GURJIT SINGH vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARY — Crl.A. No. 1492 - 1493/2010
Case under Section II-B. Status: DISPOSED.
CNR: SCIN010100322009
Filing Date
04-Apr-2009
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 1492 - 1493/2010
Diary Number
10032/2009
Order Date
26-Nov-2019
Document Type
Judgement - of Main Case
Neutral Citation
2019 INSC 1281
Disposal Type
Partly Allowed
Data as of 03-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GURJIT SINGH
Adv. YASH PAL DHINGRA
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF PUNJAB HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARY
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI
Fixed Date by Court
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 26-Nov-2019 | Fixed Date by Court |
| 26-Sep-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 25-Sep-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 24-Sep-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 27-Aug-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
Orders
Case Summary: Gurjit Singh v. State of Punjab Court Decision: The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, upholding the conviction under Section 498-A IPC (cruelty to wife) but setting aside the conviction under Section 306 IPC (abetment of suicide) and acquitting the appellant of that charge. Key Reasoning: While the prosecution proved cruelty through dowry harassment (demanding ₹50,000), there was insufficient evidence of a direct causal link between the cruelty and the suicide. The two-month time gap between the last dowry demand and the suicide, combined with the absence of any evidence showing the accused intentionally instigated the deceased to commit suicide, meant the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act could not be drawn without establishing instigation as the first clause of abetment requires. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts