Raghbir Singh with his barchhi, Mitt Singh with his sword, Resham Singh also with a sword and Avtar Singh with a barchhi attacked Paramjit Singh, Ujagar Singh, Surjit Singh, Hansa Singh and Karnail Singh and inflicted injuries upon them.
Aggrieved by the companyviction and sentence imposed, all the appellants preferred an appeal and the High Court while companyfirming the companyviction and sentence imposed on the appellants held that the offence alleged against Raghbir A1 , Mitt Singh A 3 and Resham Singh A 10 was doubtful and on that ground acquitted them of all the charges levelled against them.
At that time, one Desa Singh, uncle of Harmesh Singh PW 10 came and informed that some persons had gathered near the land with reference to which the litigation was pending in the Court at Samana and that they might harvest the crops belonging to Hansa Singh PW 11 .
On the side of the prosecution as many as 16 witnesses were examined and 87 Exhibits were marked.
The said three accused were Kirpal Singh A 4 , Raminder Singh A 5 and Kulwant Singh A 9 .
Due to the injuries the deceased Amarjit Singh fell down, that when the companyplainant went running towards the place of occurrence, the accused party fled away from the spot with their respective weapons.
In the 313 questioning, the accused denied all the allegations against them.
The deceased was stated to have been taken to the civil hospital where he was declared dead by the doctor.
The case was companymitted to the Court of Sessions where the appellants along with three other accused came to be charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 326, 325, 324,323 read with Section 149 IPC.
There is further admission to the effect that their party also caused injuries to the companyplainant party with the rider that such causing of injuries was by way of self defence.
Based on the evidence placed before the trial Court, all the accused were found guilty of the offences alleged against them and they were companyvicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs.1000/ each for the offences under Section 148 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each, life imprisonment for each for the offence under Section 302 IPC, RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/ each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section 326 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years along with a fine of Rs.2000/ each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each and for the offence under Section 325 IPC rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with a fine of Rs.2000/ each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each.
A reading of the evidence of PWs 10, 11 and 13 read along with the version of DW 2 as regards the manner of infliction of injuries amply establish to a companysiderable extent the fact about the happening of the occurrence on the way to the disputed land in question near the bandh apparently referring to Bhatian bandh which has been specifically mentioned by the prosecution witnesses.
On hearing the said information, Harmesh Singh PW 10 along with his father the deceased Amarjit Singh, his uncle Hansa Singh, Ujagar Singh s o Chuman Singh, Paramjit Singh s o Surjit Singh, Karnail Singh s o Phuman Singh, Surjit Singh s o Atma Singh, Darshan Singh s o Surjeet Singh, Teja Singh s o Karta Singh, Ranjit Singh s o Phuman Singh all residents of Bhatian village proceeded towards the field of Hansa Singh at about 7.30 p.m., that when they reached the bandh of Bhatian Dam near the lands of Darshan Singh, the accused, namely, Kirpal Singh, Raminder Singh s o Arjun Singh, Mitt Singh, Resham Singh with swords in their hands, Balbir Singh, Jagtar Singh, Fateh Singh armed with gandasis, Raghbir Singh, Avtar Singh armed with barchhis all residents of Dera Amritsaria, Shiv Majra and Kulwant Singh s o Surjit Singh also with a sword rushed towards them raising a lalkara, that Kirpal Singh gave a sword blow upon the head of Amarjit Singh, father of Harmesh Singh PW 10 while Raminder Singh gave a blow of sword on the left arm of the deceased Amarjit Singh and Kulwant Singh attacked the deceased on his feet and Balbir Singh, Jagtar Singh and Fateh Singh also attacked the deceased with their weapons.
The other injured persons were also treated at the very same hospital, and that the statement of PW 10 was recorded at 10.35 p.m. which was forwarded to the police station at PHG, Guhla which came to be registered as FIR No.
While on the one hand, according to the prosecution, the companyplainant party was proceeding towards the land with a view to protect the crops from being harvested by the accused party, as per the version of DW 2, at the point where both the parties met at Bhatian bandh, a clash occurred in which casualties were the death of the deceased Amarjit Singh apart from injuries sustained by Hansa Singh PW 11 , Jagtar Singh, Paramjit Singh Surjit Singh S o Atma Ram, Karnail Singh and Harmesh Singh son of the deceased Amarjit Singh.
According to the case of prosecution, there was a civil suit pending as between Hansa Singh PW 11 and Surjit Singh S o Kundan Singh DW 2 at Samana Punjab , that there was also an interim order granted by the Civil Court in favour of Hansa Singh PW 11 as against Surjit Singh, that after hearing was over on 09.04.2003 in the Civil Court, the companyplainant party returned back home and were present at the house of PW 10 Harmesh Singh s o Amarjit Singh in the evening.
DWs 1 to 7 were examined on the defence side.
He fairly admitted that while he received lot of injuries, the companyplainant party also received injuries.
All the sentences were to run companycurrently.
Accused Nos.
The second accused is the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1475/2010.
51 dated 09.04.2003.
He further went on to depose that when they had gone on Killa towards the West through the bandh, the companyplainant party pounced upon the whole lot of them but caused injuries only to him.
Being aggrieved of the above companyviction and sentence imposed on the appellants and the companyfirmation of the same by the High Court, the appellants have companye forward with this appeal.
Thereafter PW 15 Sub Inspector took up the investigation, inspected the place of occurrence recorded the statement of witnesses, companylected the opinion of doctors, prepared the draft sketch, companylected blood stained earth from the place of occurrence, took steps for the arrest of the accused and based on the admissible portion of their companyfessional statement recovered the weapons and filed the final report before the Court.
4 to 9 are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.1476 of 2010.
Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J. These two appeals arise out of the companymon judgment dated 27.03.2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No.916 DB/2006 of the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh.
