CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Buta Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 24 February 1987 · Citation: (1987) 1 AICLR 504 : (1987) 1 RCR(Criminal) 315

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.S.Sodhi, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 601 of 1987 (O&M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 351 words

S.S. Sodhi, J.

1.

The case against the petitioners Sohan Singh, Buta Singh and Balcharan Singh is that they along with their coaccused Sant Singh were apprehended from the haveli of Sant Singh where they had collected and were conspiring to commit murders of the members of the Hindu community, in order to facilitate the establishment of Khalistan. At the time of their apprehension a .38 bore country made revolver along with four live cartridges, was also said to have been recovered from the possession of Balcharan Singh. The material on record against the petitioners consists of the statements of Head Constable Ajaib Singh and Assistant Commandant S.N. Sharma.

2.

Both Head Constable Ajaib Singh and Assistant Commandant S.N. Sharma have made a general statement to the effect that the petitioners and their coaccused Sant Singh were sitting together and conspiring in the manner alleged, but it is pertinent to note from a reading of their statements that they do not disclose the basis on which they formed the opinion that the petitioners and their coaccused Sant Singh were indeed hatching the alleged conspiracy inasmuch as there is no mention of what any of these persons said or did which led them to believe that they were indeed so conspiring. In such matters it would clearly be unsafe to rely upon the mere opinion of witnesses without the witnesses disclosing the material on the basis of which such opinion was formed by them.

3.

Another matter of material significance is the fact, as found by the Presiding Officer of the designated court, that Sant Singh, coaccused of the present petitioners was totally blind and thus incapable of committing any offence under Sections 3 and 4 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985.

4.

Further, in the circumstances, the recovery of the country made revolver from the possession of petitioner Balcharan Singh also does not justify denial of bail to him as prayed.

5.

The petitioners are accordingly ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur.

JUDGMENT accordingly.