For the murder of Bhura Singh, the High Court companyvicted A 1 and A 2 under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and for the same offence A 3 and A 4 were companyvicted under Sections 302/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs 5,000 each in default of payment of which to further undergo six months RI.
The empty cartridges were sent to the ballastic expert who after test firing gave the opinion that the empty cartridges were fired through the gun belonging to A 1 and another shell was fired from the pistol of A 3.
For murderous assault on Gurjant Singh, PW 6, Jagwinder Singh, A 4 was also companyvicted under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo five years RI and for the same offence A , A 2 and A 3 were also companyvicted under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo five years RI.
Each of the accused was further sentenced to pay Rs 2,000 as fine failing which to undergo two months RI.
During the companyrse of the investigation, however, the police did number send A 2 and A 4 for trial.
He was examined by PW 3 who found on him a penetrating wound with inverted margins on the lateral aspect of the right lower leg above the ankle joint and there was a companyresponding injury.
Likewise on the dead body of Mander Singh, D 1, another doctor, PW 1 found five gunshot injuries which were sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
The accused kept firing and raising shouts.
DW 4 Surinder Singh, Assistant Station Master spoke about the departure of train No.
PW 5 went to Village Dhunika and informed his father Mander Singh, D 1 about the morning incident.
The accused were standing at a higher elevation on both the sides.
The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PWs 5, 6 and 7, who figured as eyewitnesses and out of them PW 6 was the injured witness.
A 1 produced 12 bore gun Ex.
He found that the empty cartridge shell has been fired through Mauser pistol Ex.
The learned companymitting Magistrate, however, did number agree with the police and he companymitted all the four accused to the Sessions Court.
The doctor, PW 2, who companyducted the postmortem on the dead body of Bhura Singh, D 2 found 10 injuries which companyld have been caused by a firearm and which were sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
PW 7, Sham Kaur and PW 6 lived at Village Dhunika.
A 3 fired a shot which hit the tyre of the tractor and the same got deflated.
The expert also gave the opinion that the metallic piece recovered from the tube of the front tyre of the tractor was number a bullet but was a pellet.
The accused in support of their defence examined DWs.
The learned trial Judge after extracting the prosecution case proceeded to companysider 521 the plea taken by A 1 and the evidence of the defence witnesses thereafter and also companysidered the medical evidence and certain other circumstances like PWs 5 and 7 number having received injuries.
But meanwhile the firing was going on and when the same stopped PW 5 left the house of PW 8 and reached the Police Station, Sangat and reported the matter to SI, PW 15 who recorded the FIR and went to the scene of occurrence in the morning of February 25, 1979.
They also gave a history about the previous case.
PW 6 narrated the incident to PW 8.
The remand order was challenged in the Supreme Court, which after setting aside the judgment remanding the case, remitted the case to the High Court with the direction that the High Court itself should dispose of the appeals.
He saw that Mander Singh, D 1 had a pistol and Bhura Singh, D 2 had a gun and the tractor proceeded towards the house of A 1 who was present in the companyrtyard of his house.
Sarwan Singh, father of Mander Singh, deceased 1 D 1 for short and Bhura Singh, deceased 2 D 2 for short were prosecuted for those murders.
The trial companyrt companyvicted Mohinder Singh, A 1 under Section 304, Part I, IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years RI and acquitted the others.
The State preferred an appeal.
Bhura Singh, D 2 lived at Village Mohalan and his brother D 1 and Jasdev Singh lived at Village Dhunika at a distance of 1 1/2 miles from Village Mohalan as they owned land there.
PW 6 jumped from the trailer on the ground and A 4 fired towards PW 6 hitting him on the right leg.
PWs 5 and 7 jumped from the tractor and ran away.
They reached the house of Baldev Singh, PW 8, a member of the Gram Panchayat of Village Mohalan.
PW 7, Sham Kaur is the widow of Sarwan Singh and mother of deceased 1 and 2.
Each of them was further companyvicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo one years RI.
DW 1, Surjit Singh, is the owner of a workshop at Samrala and he testified to the alibi of A 4.
The SI inspected the place of occurrence, got the same photographed and he found the dead body of Mander Singh, D 1 in front of the tractor and the dead body of Bhura Singh, D 2 behind the trailer.
PW 6 was sent for medical examination.
555 of 1984.
The accused pleaded number guilty and stated that PW 6 was a lessee of Mander Singh, D 1 and PW 7 lived at Village Dhunika and they also stated that there was factionalism between Gurcharan Singh and others and they were falsely implicated.
The prosecution case is as follows All the accused, the deceased and the material witnesses belong to Village Mohalan.
A 4 armed with a 12 bore D.B.B.L. gun and A 3 armed with a pistol were standing on the left side.
Gurdev Singh flung a gandasa blow towards Bhura Singh, but he ducked.
He also found that Ronak Singh, PW 5 had attended the companylege at Bhatinda on that day and therefore he companyld number have been present in the village.
On February 24, 1979 at about 6.30 a.m. Bhura Singh, D 2 was going on his tractor in Village Mohalan.
P 9 and A 3 produced his licenced pistol Ex.
At about 6.30 p.m. on that very day, they were going back to Village Dhunika from Village Mohalan on the tractor driven by PW 5.
Shortly thereafter he heard some gunshots from the side of the house of the deceased.
The High Court reversed the order of acquittal and companyvicted Mohinder Singh, A 1 and Gurcharan Singh, A 2 under Section 302 IPC for companymitting the murder of Mander Singh and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and for the same offence Bharpur Singh, A 3 and Jagwinder Singh, A 4 were companyvicted under Sections 302/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs 5,000 each in default of payment of which to further undergo six months RI.
Then he looked over the companyrtyard wall and he was fired at by Mander Singh, D 1 who was equipped with a Mauser and also by Bhura Singh, D 2 who was carrying a gun and some of the pellets hit the wall and to save himself he fired some shots towards the side of the assailants and he did number know anything else and he was arrested by the police.
At that stage, Nachhattar Singh, came there and intervened.
A , however, stated that on February 24, 1979, the day of occurrence at about 9 a.m. he was sitting in his house and he heard some lalkaras that he should be burnt down.
He further found D 1 was armed with a pistol and the gunshots at the deceased were fired from a higher level as opined by the medical evidence.
On February 27, 1979 Harnek Singh, SI, PW 13 arrested A 1 and A 3.
A 4 Jagwinder Singh also stated on the same lines but added that on February 24, 1979 he had gone to Samrala to purchase a thrasher and he was at that place for purchasing the same on that day thereby pleading alibi.
Mander Singh, D 1 was sitting on the right side of the mudguard of the tractor and PW 7 was sitting on the left side.
Accordingly the High Court after companysidering the evidence of the eyewitnesses as well as the evidence of the defence witnesses and the reasoning of the trial Judge held that the evidence of the eyewitnesses is believeable and companyvicted the appellants as stated above.
About 30 to 35 years back, Pratap Singh, father of A 1 and Kirpal Singh, his uncle were murdered.
Ronak Singh, PW 5 is the son of Mander Singh, deceased 1 and Gurjant Singh, PW 6 is his partner in cultivation.
He, however, got a minor injury near the ear.
All the sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
Mander Singh, D 1, PW 5, Ronak Singh, PW 6, Gurjant Singh and PW 7, Sham Kaur came to Village Mohalan to enquire about the health of Bhura Singh.
The two assailants while leaving threatened that they would see the end of Bhura Singh some other time.
All these four accused were tried for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC for causing the death of Mander Singh and Bhura Singh, sons of Sarwan Singh by shooting them and under Sections 307/34 for attempted murder of one Gurjant Singh, PW 6.
Bhura Singh jumped out of the tractor.
Govind Singh caused an abrasion on the right side of his back.
In other words he supported the statement of A 1.
Inquests were held and the dead bodies were sent for postmortem.
From near the dead body of Mander Singh, the SI picked up a Mauser pistol and a holster companytaining 20 rounds.
The learned trial Judge found that PWs 5, 6 and 7, the eyewitnesses were chance witnesses and were interested in the deceased.
The High Court allowed the appeal filed by the State and dismissed the appeal filed by A 1.
840 of 1985.
There was another penetrating wound with inverted margins on the lateral aspect of the right foot of PW 6.
Therefore the version of the eyewitnesses does number tally and that also makes their presence doubtful.
DW 2, Ramesh Lal, a clerk of Rajinder Government College, Bhatinda, where PW 5 was studying, produced an attendance register to show that he attended his companylege on that day.
Bhura Singh was sent for medical examination and the doctor found a lacerated wound near the right ear.
A 2 fired another shot hitting Bhura Singh, D 2 in the abdomen.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. These two appeals arise out of a companymon judgment of the Punjab Haryana High Court.
339 on February 24, 1979 from Sangat Railway Station for Bhatinda at 7.15 p.m. DW 5, Hans Singh, a member of the Panchayat of Village Kot Guru stated to have travelled on the day of occurrence at about 8 p.m. in the tractor driven by Mander Singh from Sangat Railway Crossing to Village Kot Guru and Bhura Singh, D 2, Baldev Singh, PW 8 and Master Kaur Singh were also travelling in that tractor.
A 4 is the son of Gurcharan Singh, A 2.
Pratap Singh, Bala Singh and Kirpal Singh were real brothers.
A 1 fired a shot hitting Bhura Singh on the front side of the left shoulder who fell down on the ground from the trailer.
Govind Singh shouted that he would take revenge of his father on that day.
One 12 bore empty cartridge was also recovered along with 12 wads, 9 lead pieces, and one brass empty cartridge.
A 1 and one Govind Singh are the sons of Pratap Singh.
Ronak Singh, PW 5, nephew of Bhura Singh raised alarm.
A 2 and A 3 are the sons of Bala Singh.
DW 6, Teja Singh, Sarpanch of Village Kot Guru stated that he had seen Mander Singh, D 1, Bhura Singh, D 2 and a few others drinking at the house of Master Kaur Singh at Village Guru Ke on the date of occurrence at about 8 p.m. DW 7, Darshan Singh styled himself as a full fledged eyewitness of the occurrence and stated that on the day of occurrence he was at his baithak, when he saw the two deceased persons and three four other persons going on a tractor towards the house of the deceased.
Gurcharan Singh, Bharpur Singh and Jagwinder Singh, original accused 2 to 4 are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.
Hence the present appeals have been filed by the companyvicted accused under Section 2 of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act read with Section 379 CrPC.
A 1 fired another shot which hit Mander Singh on the back.
This was said to be the immediate motive for the occurrence.
When the tractor reached near the house of Jagga Mistri, PW 5 and his companypanions saw A 1 and A 2 standing towards their right side armed with 12 bore D.B.B.L. guns.
Mohinder Singh, original accused I is the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
Bhura Singh went to the police station and made a report.
Mohinder Singh, A 1 also preferred an appeal challenging his companyviction under Section 304, Part I, IPC.
The trial companyrt also believed the evidence of alibi.
Gurcharan Singh, A 2 died during the pendency of the appeal.
The trial Judge thereafter accepted the alibi evidence and also the evidence of the other defence witnesses to exclude the presence of PW 5.
DW 3, Kulwinder Singh, a Professor in the same companylege testified that he had taken the Economics period on February 24, 1979 at 9.30 a.m. and Ronak Singh, PW 5 was present in that class during that period.
PW 12, ASI went to Village Mohalan for inquiring into that incident and he arrested Gobind Singh and Gurdev Singh and locked them up in the police station.
When he was near the Dharamshala of the village, Gobind Singh s o Partap Singh and Gurdev Singh s o Gel Singh came out of the Dharamshala armed with gandasa.
1 to 8.
Shri A.N. Mulla and Shri R.K. Jain, learned companynsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the trial companyrt has given good reasons for number believing the evidence of PWs 5 to 7 namely that PW 5 companyld number have been present in view of the evidence of DWs 2 and 3 which shows that he was in the companylege on that day and that the version of the eyewitnesses is in companyflict with the medical evidence and that the recovery of pistol of Mander Singh, D 1 would show that the deceased party was the aggressor.
Bhura Singh, D 2 was standing and PW 6 was sitting in the trailer attached to that tractor and was facing towards the drivers seat.
A 2 fired a shot hitting Mander Singh, D 1 on the neck who clumped down over the tractor.
