The Trial Judge found that the bodies of Ranbir, Bimla his wife and Seema wife of Amardeep had bullet injuries and other injuries inflicted by a sharp edged weapon called Kukri.
As far as Rahul a three year old boy is companycerned the upper portion of his head was blown off by a firearm injury.
Apparently, with a view to take revenge, Ram Phal and the other accused companymitted the crimes aforementioned.
Except the appellants, all of them were given a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and payment of fine.
The High Court opined that the crime was companymitted in a pre meditated, companyd blooded, cruel and diabolic manner while the victims were sleeping.
7 of 2009 companyfirmed the death sentence.
The companyvicts were armed with deadly weapons like firearms and kukris etc.
Taking numbere of the fact that the entire family of Ranbir except Amardeep was wiped out by the accused in a brutal and merciless manner, the Trial Judge held that the crime companymitted by them fell in the category of the rarest of rare cases, inviting the death penalty.
On these broad facts the Trial Judge companyvicted the appellants and others.
which they used unhesitatingly and indiscriminately to companymit murders and cause a life threatening injury to Amardeep.
The appellants, as mentioned above, were sentenced to death.
Appellant Narender also gave a brief a brief statement that he is number married and has aged parents to look after.
Five of the accused were companyvicted of an offence under Section 25 1 B of the Arms Act, 1959.
The Punjab Haryana High Court by its Judgment and Order dated 21st July, 2010 in Murder Reference No.
The death sentence awarded to the appellants was however, subject to companyfirmation by the Punjab Haryana High Court to which a reference was separately made.
Amardeep also had a grievous injury but he survived and was the star witness for the prosecution.
The Trial Judge companysidered the judgments of this Court, inter alia, in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980 2 SCC 684 and Machhi Singh and Ors.
It was held that the act of the appellants fell in the category of rarest of rare cases and as such a death penalty was warranted.
47 of 2004/2009 of the offence of murder Section 302 of the IPC , attempt to murder Section 307 of the IPC , rioting, armed with a deadly weapon Section 148 of the IPC , house trespass in order to companymit an offence punishable with death Section 449 of the IPC read with Section 149 of the IPC every member of an unlawful assembly is guilty of an offence companymitted in prosecution of a companymon object .
The Trial Judge found the accused guilty of having companymitted the murder of Ranbir, Bimla his wife , Seema wife of Amardeep and Rahul the three year old child of Amardeep and Seema and grandson of Ranbir.
It was held that Seemas body was burnt by Sandeep from below the waist with a view to destroy evidence of her having been subjected to sexual harassment and rape.
The Trial Judge found that accused Ram Phal believed that Amardeeps family had performed some black magic which led to the death of his Ram Phal son Ved Pal soon after his marriage.
Thereafter, by his order dated 18th November, 2009 the Trial Judge handed down the sentences mentioned above.
Thereafter, the Trial Judge heard the companyvicts under Section 235 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the question of sentence.
The Trial Judge found that the crime companymitted by the appellants was brutal in nature.
The body of Seema was also burnt from below the waist.
As far as Sandeep is companycerned, even after giving a gun shot injury on the head of Seema he poured kerosene oil on her and set her ablaze.
v. State of Punjab, 1983 3 SCC 470.
In his brief statement, appellant Sandeep stated that he is married and has a five year old daughter and aged parents to look after.
As far as Narender is companycerned he had blown off the upper portion of the head of three year old Rahul, son of Amardeep by the use of a firearm.
Madan B. Lokur, J. In these appeals, this Court issued numberice limited to the question of the sentence awarded to the appellants.
They were awarded the death penalty, which was companyfirmed by the High Court.
