The companyplainant and his mother though requested the accused number to beat the deceased, the accused did number pay any heed to their request and took away Som Raj to the flour mill of one Tara Singh and tore off his clothes.
The accused again caught hold of Som Raj and given severe beatings to him and brought him near the bus stop of the village.
1 to 4.
At that point of time, the appellant herein Ramji A5 , who appeared there in his SPO uniform repeatedly gave kick blows to Som Raj on his head, chest and neck.
Upon informing by the hospital authorities, Inspector Ram Prakash PW 9 went to the hospital and recorded the statement of companyplainant and registered FIR against the accused.
By applying full force, Ramji A5 pressed the neck of Som Raj till he became unconscious.
It was followed by the arrest of the accused and recovery of weapons used in the offence.
Thereafter, all the accused lifted Som Raj and thrown him in front of his house and fled away.
The companyplainant took him to Civil Hospital, Mukerian where he succumbed to the injuries at about 12.30 a.m. on 22.7.1995.
The learned trial Judge, at the end of trial, formed the opinion that all the accused were guilty of offence under Section 304 read with Section 149, IPC and accordingly companyvicted them and sentenced to suffer seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ each, in default, to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.
Assailing his companyviction and sentence, the appellant A5 is in appeal before us.
After preparing inquest report and recording statements of witnesses, the I.O. visited the spot, prepared site plan.
Soon thereafter, their neighboring residents Sukhdev Singh A1 , Sandeep Singh A2 , Ramesh Singh A3 and Lali Tarlok Singh A4 armed with deadly weapons came from the upstairs dragging Som Raj and beating him with the weapons alleging that he had thrown stones into their house.
In the companymotion, Som Raj managed to escape from their clutches and ran into the house of Bansi Lal in nude form itself and bolted from inside.
All the accused persons aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court approached the High Court in appeal while the companyplainant preferred Criminal Revision Petition and the State has filed separate appeal before the High Court.
By the judgment impugned herein, the High Court while dismissing the appeals of the accused, allowed the State appeal and disposed of the Criminal Revision filed by the companyplainant by setting aside the judgment of the trial Court and altered the companyviction of accused from the offence under Section 304, Part II to the offence under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/ each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.
We have heard learned companynsel for the appellant as also learned senior companynsel appearing for the State.
The case was then companymitted to the Court of learned Sessions Judge for trial.
V. RAMANA, J. These appeals arise out of companymon judgment and order dated 21st January, 2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal Nos.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SATISH KUMAR YADAV Date 2018.11.27 The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 21 st July, 163009 IST Reason 1995 at about 9 p.m. when the companyplainant Darshan Lal PW 5 and his mother were sitting in the companypound of their house, his brother Som Raj deceased went upstairs.
