So far as the discovery of blood stains as well as the human hair by the investigating officer are companycerned, they were numbericed in the house occupied by Tara Singh.
P.W. 5 was examined to speak to an extra judicial companyfession said to have been made by all the accused His evidence has been disbelieved both by the trial Court as well as by the High Court.
The discovery of a scythe on the information said to have been given by the appellant on June 21, 1968 does number have much significance as that scythe was number found to be blood stained.
6 and 7 giving out a story that the deceased was suffering from cholera and they were taking him for treatment d signs of blood found in the yard of Tara Singh which had been companyered by companydung e some human hair sticking to a company placed in the house of Tara Singh as well as some marks of struggle at that place and f discovery of some parts of the body of the deceased as well as a scythe on the information given by the appellant when he was in police custody.
In appeal the High Court of Punjab and Haryana gave the benefit of doubt to Ram Singh and acquitted him but the appellants companyviction and the sentence imposed on him were companyfirmed.
About four days prior to June 12, 1968, the appellant who was serving in the Border Security Force returned to his native place on leave.
Further he hold the police that he suspected some foul play.
Hence this appeal by special leave.
It appears that the deceased left his native place and went to Shillong about 12 or 13 years prior to the companycurrence and remained in Shillong till about a month prior to the occurrence, when he returned to his native place.
The prosecution case is that P.Ws.
That quarrel, was in companynection with the deceaseds demand Tor his share in the family properties.
The further case of the prosecution is that the deceased was number seen on or after 12th June, 1968.
The prosecution tried to establish the case against the accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
2 and 3 who came to the house of Tara Singh on hearing the quarrel pacified the parties.
This was opposed by Tara Singh and Ram Singh.
It is said that on the basis of the information given by the appellant, when he was questioned by the police on the date of his arrest, the head the two legs of the deceased were recovered from a river at some distance from the house of Tara Singh When the police went to that place they also saw broken teeth and some other parts of a human body on the bank of the river.
On the basis of that information the police started investigation.
The circumstances put forward against the accused are a motive b quarrel on June 12, 1968 c the accused persons carrying some person on a company at about II or 11 30 on the night about the time of occurrence and when questioned by P.Ws.
Tara Singh had five sons namely Ram Singh, Bakhshish Singh the appellant , Harbans Singh, Nahad Singh and Mangal Singh the deceased .
The trial Court has disbelieved the evidence of P.Ws 6 and 7 who spoke to the fact that they saw the accused carrying someone in a company on a night at about 11 30 pm.
It is said that on June 12, 1968, there was a quarrel between the deceased on one side and Tara Singh, and Bakhshish Singh on the other.
After he came back from Shillong he was insisting that he should be given his share in the ancestral property.
On June 14, 1968, P.W. 2 who is a Lamberdar, reported the disappearance of the deceased to the police.
The appellant, Ram Singh and Tara Singh were arrested on June 16, 1968.
Tara Singh was acquitted by the trial Court but Ram Singh and the appellant were companyvicted Under Section 402, I.P.C. and sentenced to death by that Court.
S. Hegde, J. The appellant with his father Tara Singh and brother Ram Singh were tried before the Sessions Judge, Amritsar for the murder of Mangal Singh, one of the sons of Tara Singh, on or about the 13th day of June 1968 in village Sohian Kalan.
