The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed an appeal filed by Rajan, convicted in a 1998 college murder case in Sirsa, Haryana. The bench, while affirming the life sentence handed down earlier by the trial court and upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, also expressed concern over the High Court’s delay of more than two years in uploading its reasoned judgment after pronouncing the operative order.
Background
The case dates back to July 22, 1998, when a violent clash erupted outside National College, Sirsa. According to the FIR filed by injured eyewitness Balbir Singh, a group of armed men, including Rajan, confronted Shiv Dutt Singh allegedly over past enmity and college election rivalries. While Rajan reportedly fired a pistol shot that missed, co-accused Naresh and Vikas fired 12-bore guns that fatally injured Shiv Dutt. He succumbed at the Civil Hospital within half an hour.
Read also:- Delhi High Court dismisses plea to quash sexual harassment case, says departmental exoneration not enough
The trial court convicted Rajan and Vikas for murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment. Naresh, who absconded during trial, was later tried separately and also convicted. Other accused were acquitted. Rajan’s appeal before the High Court was dismissed in 2016, though the detailed judgment was uploaded only in July 2018, after a gap of two years and five months.
Before the Supreme Court, Rajan’s counsel argued that the inordinate delay in uploading the High Court’s judgment caused grave prejudice and warranted a remand. The defense also questioned the prosecution’s case, pointing out that no firearm was ever recovered from Rajan.
Rejecting these submissions, the bench observed, “Just because the firearm was not recovered would not render the testimony of two eyewitnesses doubtful.” It held that direct evidence from Balbir Singh and Bishan Singh was credible and sufficient.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Directs State to Decide Unmarried Daughter's Family Pension Claim Within Two Months
At the same time, the Court did not mince words on the High Court’s practice of announcing orders without timely uploading of detailed reasoning. “Such delay deprives the aggrieved party of an opportunity to seek further judicial redressal,” the bench noted, reiterating earlier guidelines in Anil Rai v. State of Bihar that judgments should be promptly pronounced and published.
Decision
Concluding that the conviction was based on trustworthy eyewitness accounts and supported by medical evidence, the Court upheld the life sentence. The appeal was dismissed, though the registry has been directed to circulate the judgment to all High Courts as a reminder against undue delay in uploading orders.
Case Title: Rajan v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 INSC 1081
Date of Judgment: 2 September 2025
