6 7 by a blunt weapon.
2, Bakha Singh and Accused No.
About two and half months prior to the date of occurrence of the incident, this land was re auctioned and Subeg Singh, Narinder Singh and Kehar Singh became successful bidders.
The dead bodies of Surmukh Singh and Tehal Singh were sent for post mortem examination.
Sub Divisional Magistrate, Assandh, took up the proceedings for ejectment of Jassa Singh and others.
Except the testimony of PW 9 and PW 10, there is numberevidence to speak about the presence of ten accused persons together at the place of incident.
Accused No.
Sub Inspector.
The Sessions Court as well as the High Court accepted the testimony of these witnesses and based on their depositions, passed orders of companyviction and sentence of these appellants.
PW 25 took over the investigation and as stated before, he visited the place of incident from where he recovered three empty cartridges and some blood stained earth was also taken into possession under a seizure memo.
Appellants Bakha Singh and Sukha Singh fired shots at others also and some of them took shelter behind the ridge of the field.
But the appellants advanced towards the tractor driven by Gurvinder Singh and Jassa Singh fired a shot at Surmukh Singh.
The High Court acquitted accused No.
Surmukh Singh fell down on the ground.
It is pertinent to numbere the injuries sustained by deceased Surmukh Singh.
Jassa Singh made a companyplaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal, alleging that the Sarpanch Surmukh Singh had leased out the land to his own persons for a lesser amount and stated that he was prepared to deposit an amount of Rs.84,000/ .
Bakha Singh and Sukha Singh were armed with guns and Jassa Singh and Lakha Singh were armed with Gandasis.
While these proceedings were pending, on 2nd July, 1992 at about 5.00 PM, Surmukh Singh, his brother Gurmukh Singh, along with some others went to the lease hold property.
We heard the learned companynsel for the appellants as well as learned companynsel for the State of Haryana.
Two companyrts have found that the appellants had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and caused the death of Surmukh Singh.
Their companyviction and sentence are challenged before us in these appeals.
Appellant Sukha Singh also fired a shot at Surmukh Singh with his 12 bore gun.
PW 9 Gurmukh Singh and PW 10 Gurvinder Singh were examined as eye witnesses.
Thereafter, all the appellants went away from the scene.
Bakha Singh fired two shots at Tehal Singh and Sukha Singh also fired a shot at Tehal Singh.
Narinder Singh, son of Balwant, and Subeg Singh then filed a civil suit before the civil companyrt, Karnal, for an injunction to restrain the officers from putting up the land on re auction.
The Gandasis were alleged to have been recovered pursuant to their statement.
After some time, Gurmukh Singh heard the sound of a firearm shot from the side of the dera of Labh Singh and later he came to know that Tehal Singh had died of gunshot injuries sustained at the hands of Lakha Singh and others.
PW 14 Darbara Singh and his son Gurdev Singh made a hue and cry and the appellants ran away from the place of occurrence with their weapons.
Accused Jassa Singh instituted a civil suit to retain possession of the said leasehold land.
Counsel for the appellants companytended that all the eye witnesses examined in this case were highly interested witnesses and the companyrts below have accepted their evidence without proper scrutiny.
Along with them, Ajmer Singh, Waryam Singh, Narinder Singh, son of Bawa Singh, were also there.
Injury No.
Gurmukh Singh and his deceased brother, Surmukh Singh made an appeal to the appellants number to pick up a quarrel and that they may settle the dispute in companyrt.
Kehar Singh is the brother of deceased Surmukh Singh.
On the side of the prosecution, 27 witnesses were examined to prove the first incident.
6, Labh Singh, son of Inder Singh and companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence of all other accused persons.
The Asstt.
Darbara Singh stated that at about 6.15 PM, he along with his son Gurdev Singh went to the dera of Resham Singh where Tehal Singh and Kuldeep Singh had also companye in search of some labourers for planting paddy on the next day.
He also companytended that the Sessions Court should number have tried the cases relating to two incidents as one case and this has seriously prejudiced the case of the appellants.
Pursuant to the direction of the Deputy Commissioner, Jassa Singh deposited the sum of Rs.84,000/ with the Block Development Panchayat Officer.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are thus.
The blood stained clothes and other articles were also taken into custody.
There is also numberevidence to show that these Gandasis were stained with human blood.
Surmukh Singh, the Sarpanch, then initiated proceedings before the Sub Divisional Magistrate to evict Jassa Singh from the property.
According to prosecution case, appellants Jassa Singh, Kabul Singh, Jeet Singh, Labh Singh, Lakha Singh, Sarang Singh, Satnam Singh and Swaran Singh started attacking Surmukh Singh with their Gandasis.
Appellant, Bakha Singh also fired a shot at Surmukh Singh.
The learned companynsel submitted that this was a wanton act of criminal trespass and the appellants were entitled to exercise their right of private defence and, therefore, they have number companymitted any offence.
To prove the second incident relating to the death of Tehal Singh, PW 14 Darbara Singh and PW 15 Gurdev Singh were examined.
While appellants Jassa Singh, Bakha Singh Suklha Singh were armed with guns, other accused persons were having Gandasis with them.
That apart, the second incident wherein Tehal Singh was done to death, is projected by prosecution as a sequel to the first incident, but there is numberexplanation as to where the six persons had gone leaving the four persons who allegedly caused the death of Tehal Singh.
The civil companyrt granted the injunction in favour of Narinder Singh and others.
The Gram Panchayat companytested the suit and the civil companyrt passed an order to the effect that Jassa Singh shall be divested of his possession only in accordance with law.
They had been in possession of this land for about 10 12 years.
When PW 14, Darbara Singh reached near the field of Resham Singh, appellants Bakha Singh, Jassa Singh, Lakha Singh and Sukha Singh came running to that place.
But the recovery of these weapons was number proved by independent witnesses.
There were two tractors one was being driven by one Gurvinder Singh and the other by Subeg Singh.
1 was an incised wound on the right side of the skull injury number 2 a punctured wound with lacerated margins on the left side of the chest injury number 3 a multiple punctured wound with lacerated margins on the left arm injury number 4 multiple punctured wounds with lacerated margins on the right arm injury number 5 a multiple punctured wound with lacerated margins on the right side of the chest injury number 6 a lacerated wound on the right elbow and injury number 7 multiple bruises on the back.
At about 6.00 PM when Surmukh Singh and Narinder Singh were sitting on the boundary of the field, all the appellants came there.
All possible independent evidence to companynect these five appellants to the crime is lacking.
All the accused filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab Haryana.
He further companytended that the appellants were entitled to get benefit of the right of private defence as Surmukh Singh and others had companye to the property, which was still in the possession of Jassa Singh, and started ploughing the field.
According to prosecution, Labh Singh and Jassa Singh made exhortations to kill Surmukh Singh, the Sarpanch.
7 Sukha Singh were also found guilty under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act .
Sub Inspector immediately reached the place of occurrence and made arrangements for taking photographs.
PW 25, Rohtash Singh, the Station House Officer visited the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest over the dead bodies of Surmukh Singh and Tehal Singh.
PW 2, the doctor gave evidence to the effect that while injury number 1 was caused by a sharp weapon, injury number.2, 3, 4 5 were caused by fire arms and injury number.
The statement of PW 14, Darbara Singh, was recorded by Rohtash Singh.
As regards the death of Tehal Singh, the companyrt held that four appellants, namely, Jassa Singh, Bakha Singh, Lakha Singh and Sukha Singh were responsible.
Deceased Surmukh Singh was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Jalmana.
This Gram Panchayat had leased out 25 acres of land in favour of the first accused, Jassa Singh alias Jaswant Singh and the 8th accused , Sarang Singh, son of Dalip Singh.
Gurmukh Singh gave First Information Statement before the Police, which was recorded by Jarnail Singh, Asstt.
All the accused were found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for life for the offences under Section 302 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC.
G. BALAKRISHNAN, J. Ten accused persons were tried by the Additional Court of Sessions, Karnal, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 148 read with Section 149 IPC, for causing death of two persons, namely, Surmukh Singh and Tehal Singh.
