SC upholds life sentence awarded to terrorist

SC upholds life sentence awarded to terrorist The Supreme Court has upheld the life sentence awarded to a Punjab terrorist convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA) for killing a reformed terrorist who refused to take up militant activities again. A bench of Justices S B Sinha and L S Panta while upholding the sentence imposed by the Designated TADA court, rejected the claim of convict Dilbagh Singh that he was falsely implicated by the police. The convict alleged the police had killed the victim, Jagmail Singh, in a fake encounter and put the blame on him. The apex court in its judgement said that testimony of the deceased's brother and father who were eye-witnesses to the killing were cogent and convincing, which it said, substantiated the other material and medical evidence produced by the prosecution. "We find that they are truthful witnesses who have helplessly witnessed the crime from close range but could not help the deceased because of the sudden attack on him by the accused who were three in number with deadly fire arms," the bench observed, while dismissing the appeal filed by Dilbagh Singh. The designated court had convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment Dilbagh Singh for killing Jagmail Singh on 9th May, 1992 at Atalan village, Patiala district, Punjab at the height to militancy. The prosecution said Jagmail Singh, a former terrorist had quit the extremist activities to marry and lead a reformed life as a farmer. But Dilbagh Singh was a opposed to his move and he along with two others shot dead Jagmail Singh. The killing was witnessed by the victim's father Balkar Singh and brother Kirandeep Singh. Kirandeep Singh had testified in court that though he was armed with the firearms given by the Government for self-defence, he could not retaliate as the attack by Dilbagh Singh and his accomplices was sudden and terrifying. "It was but natural that under such fearful and dangerous circumstances it could not be expected from people of ordinary prudence such as Balkar Singh and Kirandeep Singh that they could counter the terrorists who had come with a premeditated plan to take revenge on the deceased," the apex court observed. The bench said the evaluation of the findings recorded by the designated court "do not suffer from manifest error and improper appreciation of evidence on record warranting any interference in this appeal." The apex court found no merit in the appeal.

"Loved reading this piece by SANJAY DIXIT?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group