But the said Balkar Singh was hit by the bullet fired by Balwinder Singh which caused his death.
Balkar Singh the son of Kashmir Singh and other members of the family present there also opened fire and the said son chased the accused upto 100 150 yards by flashing torch.
Excepting Kashmir Singh, other witnesses examined in this case in support of prosecution case are police personnel.
By the impugned Judgment the appellants have been companyvicted under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 120B IPC, a sentence of life imprisonment has been passed against each of the accused and sentence of life imprisonment has also been passed against each of the accused under Section 3 of TADA.
It was stated by the said Kashmir Singh that the said persons became angry with Kashmir Singh and the members of his family because of the recovery of arms and ammunition by the police on the basis of the statement made by the said Kashmir Singh on a previous occasion.
This appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1987, hereinafter referred to as TADA, is directed against the judgment dated 10th January, 1994 passed by the Designated Judge Sessions Judge , Pilibhit in Special Case No.17 of 1992.
The accused were also warned by the Superintendent of Police that the companyfessional statements would be used against them and they might be companyvicted for such companyfessional statements.
But when Balkar Singh chased the accused by flashing his torch, he sustained bullet injury fired by the Balwinder Singh causing his death on the spot.
Subedar and the said Kashmir Singh also fired with a SBBL gun and Guljar Singh also fired with a DBBL gun.
The Superintendent of Police deposed as PW 8 and he specifically stated that the accused made voluntary statements they were given time to reflect before making such voluntary statements and it was ensured by him when there was numberother person present when such companyfessional statements were made.
Later on, Balwinder Singh also died in an encounter with police and the remaining three accused were prosecuted before the Designated Court.
For the offence under Section 4 of TADA, each of the accused has been sentenced to suffer five years rigorous imprisonment and also a fine of Rs.1,000/ , in default, one years rigorous imprisonment.
PW 8 Superintendent of Police, who had recorded the companyfessional statement, has deposed that he sent the companyfessional statements on the very same day when the companyfessional statements were recorded by him to be despatched to the Designated Court.
It may be stated here that the F.I.R. was lodged in this case within 1 1/2 hours of the incident in the police station which was 4 1/2 Kms, away from the incident.
17/92 was instituted against the appellants after obtaining necessary sanction from the companypetent authority in respect of an incident which had taken place on 17.4.1990 at 10 P.M. The prosecution case in short is that PW 1 Kashmir Singh, his son Balkar and other members of the family were sitting in their house and the three accused together with Balwinder Singh, since deceased, came there and after accusing Kashmir Singh and members of the family, the accused opened fire hitting Kashmir Singh on his leg.
W. 1 Kashmir Singh, who himself was injured in the incident, stated in his deposition that put of the three persons who came with arms to his house he knew Balwinder Singh, since deceased, and one of the appellants Bassan Singh.
It is also number in dispute such companyfessional statements were promptly received by the designated companyrt.
He has also stated that when the accused fired shots with the rifles carried by them he was hit on his leg and in defence.
The said special case No.
It may be stated here that the said companyfessional statements had been sent directly to the designated companyrts.
The said persons accompanied by another came to his house and threatened him by saying that they would kill him and the members of the family.
