It is on this basis the High Court allowed the appeal.
The further case of the prosecution is that at the point of time, respondent Harbans Singh carrying the Kassia attacked Bhol Singh on the right back side of his head and companytinued to assault said Bhol Singh on the other parts of the body like his chin, right ankle, left eye brow.
The brief facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are as follows The respondent Jit Singh in these cases was son of Chanan Singh the deceased and the brother of Bhol Singh the other deceased who is also known as Gurbachan Singh.
The said PW 4 Natha Singh took Chanan Singh and Bhol Singh to the house of Gurnam Singh PW 11 who was the Sarpanch of the village around 6.30 p.m. The said Sarpanch Gurnam Singh told these people that he will look into the matter and bring about a settlement the next day morning.
The prosecution also alleges that the incident in question was numbericed by one Darshan Singh the other neighbour and after the accused ran away from the place of incident PWs.
At the Primary Health Centre, the doctor Randhir Singh PW 1 attended to the injured Bhol Singh and sent a message to the Police Outpost which is hardly one furlong away from the place of incident.
After the said attack, the prosecution alleges that both the accused persons ran away from the place.
Then while companying out of the house of PW 4, Chanan Singh was walking ahead of Bhol Singh and immediately behind them were PWs.4 and 11 who were following them near the gate of the house of Gurnam Singh PW 11 .
But on the way, it is stated that even Bhol Singh succumbed to his injuries.
On seeing, Chanan Singh the respondents herein raised lalkara that they would teach a lesson for making a demand for return of money so saying the respondent Jit Singh aimed his DBBL gun at Chanan Singh and fired a shot which hit Chanan Singh on the right side of his chest and he fell down.
With this view in mind, it is stated that on 26th of September, 1990 the respondents were in search of these two persons.
The respondent Jit Singh then allegedly aimed at Bhol Singh who was standing behind Chanan Singh but numbericing the said attempt of Jit Singh, Bhol Singh laid down on the ground because of which the shot aimed at Bhol Singh hit the wall of the house of PW 11.
away from the place of incident and on the way it is stated that Chanan Singh succumbed to the injuries.
The respondent Jit Singh was also sentenced under Section 27 of the Arms Act to undergo RI for one year and a fine of Rs.1000/ was imposed on each of the appellants for the murder of Chanan Singh and Bhol Singh in default of payment to undergo RI for a further period of one year.
4 and 11 as eye witnesses and other supporting evidences produced by the prosecution companyvicted the appellants for offences punishable under Section 302 as also under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life.
It is the prosecution case that in view of certain misunderstanding arising out of financial transaction respondent Jit Singh along with his brother in law Harbans Singh who is also respondent in these appeals had decided to eliminate Chanan Singh and Bhol Singh.
4 and 11 alongwith Darshan Singh arranged for private vehicle and took the injured persons for Primary Health Centre which is about 1 Kms.
It is the prosecution case that after the companypletion of the investigation, the respondents herein were put up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhatinda who accepting the evidence of PWs.
Having companye to know of the motives of the respondents herein in searching for them, the said Chanan Singh and Bhol Singh went to the house of PW 4 Natha Singh who happened to be the Lambardar of the village and companyplained to him that the respondents herein were searching for them in the village with the intention of eliminating them, therefore, sought his help.
The prosecution further alleges that at that time respondent Jit Singh was carrying a DBBL gun while respondent Harbans Singh was carrying Kassia.
He referred Bhol Singh to C.M.C Hospital, Ludhiana.
J U D G M E N T SANTOSH HEGDE,J. State of Punjab has preferred these appeals against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 13th July, 1994 made in Criminal Appeal No.206 DB of 1992 whereby the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondents herein and set aside the judgment and companyviction imposed on the respondents by the Learned Sessions Judge, Bhatinda.
