The injuries alleged to have been caused by them have neither been numbericed by the doctors while examining the accused persons number have they surfaced in the post mortem reports.
It is this order passed by the Trial Court which was called in question by the accused persons before the High Court.
169 DB of 2005, wherein and whereunder the High Court has allowed the appeals filed by the six accused persons namely, Kishori Lal, Gulbir, Chander Pal, Dharam Pal, Desh Raj and Sher Singh and dismissed the appeals filed by the other accused persons and thereby companyfirmed the judgment and order of the Trial Court qua the other five accused persons.
Dharam Pal gave ballam blow to Ram Kishan on the left ankle of Ram Kishan.
Amar Singh alias Amri gave lathi blow on the back of his right palm.
The Prosecution story, as numbericed by the High Court, is as under That on 04.12.1996, Complainant, Lachhman, resident of Gurwar, along with his uncle Rattan Singh and Ram Kishan alias Rama were irrigating their fields situated near Yamuna river.
Amar Singh alias Amri, Dharam Pal, Kishori Lal, Sher Singh, Bijender, Desh Raj and Gulbir were armed with ballams, Chander Pal was armed with a lathi.
The High Court, after re appreciating the entire evidence on record and carefully analyzing the submissions made by the learned companynsel for the parties, has companye to the companyclusion that the oral evidence in respect of injuries caused by Desh Raj, Kishore Lal, Dharam Pal, Chander Pal, Gulbir alias Gulli and Sher Singh is number companyroborated by the medical evidence on record.
Complainant came forward to stop the tractor then Charan fired a shot hitting the companyplainant.
Bijender gave ballam blow hitting on the right side of the head near armpit of Rattan Singh, Raula was raised.
Several recoveries including the weapons were made at the instance of accused persons.
Accused started ploughing the land with their tractor.
Chander Pal and Hukam came to the spot and had witnessed the occurrence.
Charan again fired a shot hitting the companyplainant.
First aid was given to the injured in the Palwal Hospital.
Ram Kishan on receipt of injuries fell down.
Manohar Lal was armed with a licenced gun, Charan was having a double barrel gun, Mahipal was armed with companyntry made pistol.
PW 14 and PW 15 were also examined in respect of injuries sustained by the deceased persons.
The FIR was registered based on the statement of Lachhman Singh PW 1 .
Then Sher Singh and Bijender gave blows with their respective weapons hitting on the back of Rattan Singh.
Mahipal fired a shot from his companyntry made pistol hitting on the head of Rattan Singh.
They witnessed the deceased persons and others cultivating the land and therefore forcibly entered the lands and upon resistance being offered, they assaulted the deceased persons and others with lethal weapons carried by them.
Chander Pal gave lathi blow on his waist.
Chander Pal PW 3 is an eye witness to the incident.
Charan, Dharam Pal, Chander Pal, Gulbir alias Gulli, Amar Singh alias Amri, Sher Singh, Bijender, Manohar Lal and Mahipal were on the tractors.
As a result of the assault, few were injured and two succumbed to death one while being rushed to the hospital and the other at the hospital even after being provided medical aid.
The accused persons were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ each and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year and under Section 307 IPC, for seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/ each and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months each.
Tragic case of a double murder of Ram Kishan and Rattan Singh the deceased for short on 04.12.1996.
Amar Singh alias Amri gave lathi blow hitting his left shoulder.
On receipt of fire arm injuries, companyplainant fell down then Kishore Lal gave ballam blow on the back of his right palm.
The dispute between the accused persons and the injured and deceased persons pertained to a piece of land in village Gurwari.
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.
Thereafter, accused had fled away from the spot with their respective weapons on the tractors.
Post Mortem of the dead bodies of Ram Kishan and Rattan Singh was companyducted by Dr. Dhara Singh PW 14 and Dr. Alexander F. Khakha PW 15 , respectively.
Objection was raised by the companyplainant party and requested the accused party number to plough the land because the land was in their possession and wheat crop was sown.
It transpires from the record that the accused persons had reached the said land in their tractors armed with weapons including guns.
Injured was being shifted to Palwal Hospital but on the way, Ram Kishan alias Rama had succumbed to his injuries.
Rattan Singh was referred to Delhi Hospital.
After that Ram Kishan and Rattan Singh tried to intervene and rescue the companyplainant then Amar Singh alias Amri gave ballam blow to Ram Kishan which hit on his thigh near his left leg.
The Trial Court, keeping in view the evidence of PW 1 and PW 3 and the injuries sustained by the deceased persons, has rejected the defense version with respect to right of private defense in its entirety and has reached the companyclusion that all the eleven accused persons had participated in the brutal assault and therefore companyvicted them for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 read with Sections 148 149 of the IPC.
On companypletion of investigation, the case was companymitted for trial.
Dr. Lekhi PW 7, who had medically examined deceased Rattan Singh and accused person Amar Singh, has testified in respect of the injuries on the bodies of the two persons.
PW 1 is the companyplainant and also the injured witness.
At about 12.30 p.m. Kishore Lal son of Nathi and Desh Raj son of Lakhi came there on their tractors.
They had rescued the companyplainant from the clutches of the accused party.
The prosecution has examined as many as 20 witnesses, while the defense has only examined DW 1 the Patwari of the village to speak about the ownership of the land where the incident occurred.
The aforesaid sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
