P. Rana for the respondent.
K. Garg, A. K. Gupta, Indira Jai Singh, V. J. Francis and R. S. Sharma for the appellant.
Appeal, by special leave from the judgment and order dated February 26, 1971 of the Allahabad High Court at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.
V. Rangam and A. Subhashini for the State of Tamil Nadu.
N. Bagra and M. Veerappa for the State of Mysore.,
However, the dispute was settled by persons who reached the spot at the time and numberhing untoward happened.
Chhotey Singh was murdered on September 10, 1969 at about 5.00 P.M. A day earlier, there was a quarrel between Jagmohan Singh and Jagbir Singh, on the one hand, and Chhotey Singh, on the other, on the question of a right to irrigate their fields.
Chhotey Singh fell down after running some distance and died.
Naturally Chhotey Singh tried to run away but he was chased by the appellant and shot in the back.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Next day, however, the appellant armed with a companyntry made pistol and Jagbir Singh armed with a lathi companycealed themselves in a bajra field and emerged from the same as Chhotey Singh passed by to go to his field for fetching fodder.
Bakshi Sita Ram and R. N. Sachthey for the Advocate General, Himachal Pradesh.
K. Jain and R. K. Garg for Interveners Duraipandi Thevar and Krishna Thevar .
On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Ses sions Judge held that the appellant deserved the extreme penalty.
S. Nariman, Additional Solicitor General of India, P. Parameshwara Rao and B. D. Sharma for the Attorney General.
The deceased Chhotey Singh was charged for that murder but was eventually acquitted by the High Court.
K. Gupta for intervener Shyam Narain .
In England, murder and treason were offences for which the death sentence was mandatory.
If after trial the accused was found guilty by the Jury, neither the Jury number the Judge had any discretion in the matter of sentence.
1229 of 1970 and Reference No.
96 of 1970.
But by number they had grown up and it is plain from the evidence that Chhotey Singhs murder was the result of this ill feeling.
The sentence may be reprieved by the Home Secretary after taking all the circumstances of the case and other matters into companysideration.
Both of them were minors at the time of the murder of Shivraj Singh.
The short facts of the case are that some six or seven years before the present offence, one Shivraj Singh, father of Jagbir Singh, a companysin of the appellant, was murdered.
The companyviction and the sentence are companyfirmed by the Allahabad High Court.
The appellant asked Chhotey Singh to stop so that the matter between them companyld be settled once for all.
As a result of that murder, there was ill feeling between Chhotey Singh, on the one hand, and the appellant and Jagbir Singh, on the other.
173 of 1971.
on the appellant companying to this Court by special leave, special leave was granted limited to the question of sentence only.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PALEKAR, J. The appellant Jagmohan Singh has been companyvinced under section 302 IPC for the murder of one Chhotey Singh and sentenced to death by the learned Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur.
That is how the murder was companymitted.
cannot be said on the facts of this case that there has been any breach of the principles governing the matter of sentence.
The Judge had to sentence the accused to death.
As pointed out by this Court in Ram Narain and others v. The State of U.P. 1 this Court numbermally does number interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court on the question of sentence un less the High Court has disregarded recognised principles in imposing the sentence and there has been a failure of justice.
