IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. ______ OF 2025
(From the Final Judgment and Order dated _____ passed by the High Court of _____ at _____ in Criminal Appeal No. _____ of _____)
IN THE MATTER OF:
N. ________,
S/o ____________,
R/o ________________________,
Currently Lodged in Model Jail, Chandigarh,
…Petitioner/Original Accused
VERSUS
- Union Territory of _____,
Through the Home Secretary, Secretariat, _____,
…Respondent
2.S. Singh,
S/o _____, R/o _____,
…Proforma Respondent/Original Accused
PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India
And His Companion Justices of the Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the above-named Petitioner
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
-
That the present Special Leave Petition (Criminal) is filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, challenging the judgment and order dated 26.11.2015, passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 305-DB of 2013, titled “Subeg Singh & Anr. versus The State Union Territory of Chandigarh”, whereby the appeal of the Petitioner was dismissed.
-
That the present Petition raises substantial questions of law of general public importance for consideration by this Hon’ble Court, inter alia, including:
a) Whether the evidence relied upon by the lower courts was legally sustainable and in conformity with settled principles of law?
b) Whether the conviction of the Petitioner, based on the testimony of a witness whose status as an approver was in question, vitiates the proceedings?
BRIEF FACTS
-
On the night intervening 11/12.02.2013, a murder was committed at House No. 53, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, resulting in the death of Shri Bachna Ram, a domestic servant of Shri Devinder Singh Brar. The incident came to light when Smt. Babita, a sweeper, alerted Capt. Jagat Pal Singh (PW-11), a neighbor, who then informed the police.
-
Initial investigation failed to identify the accused. Subsequently, on 08.04.2013, the investigation was taken over by Balwan Singh, S.I. (PW-24), who, along with his team, interrogated one Gurdev Singh at the residence of Mr. Devinder Singh Brar (PW-12). Based on certain disclosures, further leads were developed, resulting in the prosecution of the accused, including the Petitioner.
-
The Sessions Court convicted the Petitioner under Sections 120-B, 302/34, and alternatively, 302/114 IPC. The appeal filed before the High Court was dismissed, leading to the filing of the present Special Leave Petition.
GROUNDS
- Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High Court, the Petitioner respectfully submits the following grounds, inter alia:
A. Contrary to Law and Facts: The judgment is contrary to established legal principles and the evidence on record.
B. Partisan Evidence: The conviction was based solely on the testimony of partisan or interested witnesses, raising doubts about the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
C. Suppression of Material Facts: The prosecution failed to present the complete and true version of the occurrence, leading to a miscarriage of justice.
D. Insufficient Evidence: The evidence presented by the prosecution does not meet the standard of proof required for a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
E. Discrepancies in Witness Testimony: Material discrepancies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses render the conviction unsustainable.
F. Questionable Status of Approver: The testimony of PW-5, Gurpartap Singh, who was treated as an approver, is fraught with contradictions and lacks corroboration, rendering it unreliable.
G. Improper Examination of Approver: The process of cross-examining PW-5 after declaring him hostile was legally untenable as he had ceased to be an approver after retracting his statement.
PRAYER
- In light of the above, the Petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:
a) Grant Special Leave to Appeal against the judgment and order dated 26.11.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 305-DB of 2013;
b) Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL, AS IN DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.
NEW DELHI
Drawn On: _______________
Filed On: _______________
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
