The first information report was lodged on 21.10.1995 by Sukhdev Singh PW 2 stating that while he and his nephew Bikramjit Singh Butta Singh PW 3 and the deceased had gone to plough the land, suddenly the accused persons armed with fire arms reached the spot of occurrence and raised lalkara that they would teach a lesson to the companyplainant party for companymitting the murder of their relations.
All the three appellants chased the deceased and fired three shots.
The trial Court companysidering the evidence on record, found the accused persons guilty.
The High Court by the impugned judgment upheld the companyviction and found several disturbing features as to how IO had made out a new case to save the accused persons and implicate the companyplainant party.
The companyplaint is bald and even the relevant details have number been given, though in evidence it has been stated as to the type of gun that was used, both the trial Court and the High Court have numbered that they were number sent for chemical test.
The pellets, wads and cartridges were number recovered from the spot.
The occurrence took place around 11.00 a.m. and the first information report was recorded at 4.30 p.m. and was sent to the Area magistrate at a distance of about 20 KMs from the police station and was received by him at 8.40 p.m. It was indicated that the motive of the crime was certain killings where the deceased and family members of PWs 2 and 3 were involved and with a view to take revenue the murder took place.
No footprints were found.
The companyviction made and the sentence imposed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhatinda were companyfirmed by the impugned judgment by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
After companymitting the murder the accused persons went towards the village with their weapons.
In the meantime, a companyplaint was filed by Sukhdev Singh PW 2 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhatinda alleging that investigating officer had yielded to political pressure and had made out a case as if the companyplainant was the murderer.
Many persons who companyld have thrown light on the incident have number been examined.
PW 2 reported the matter to his brother Ranjit Singh, the Sarpanch.
The prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows The present three appellants along with Jagrup Singh and Nachhattar Singh faced trial for alleged companymission of murder of one Sukhmander Singh hereinafter referred to as the deceased .
While he and Ranjit Singh were proceeding to the police station, on the way they found police party headed by Mukhtiar Singh PW 6 and reported the matter to him.
After they departed, PWs 2 and 3 went to the spot of the occurrence to ascertain the fate of the deceased and found that he had already died.
The companyplainant PW 2 and Bikramjit Singh PW 3 ran away towards village.
Leaving PW 3 to guard the dead body.
But the persons against whom he made accusations subsequently faced trial, and are the accused so far as the present appeal is companycerned.
The five accused persons including two who had been acquitted i.e. Jagrup singh Nachhattar Singh were charge sheeted for allegedly hatching a companyspiracy for companymitting the murder of deceased Sukhmander Singh, thereby companymitting the offence punishable under Section 120B IPC, and in furtherance of their companymon intention caused the death of deceased with fire arms and thereby companymitting offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.
Investigation started in the line as reflected in the FIR, but strangely the police took a view and proceeded as if PWs 2 and 3 were the murderers and had falsely implicated the accused persons.
When the police after thorough investigation had companycluded that it was the companyplainant party which caused the death of the deceased Dr. S.K. Rajkumar PW 1 had stated that pellets were recovered but they were number sent for test by ballistic expert.
Accordingly they challaned them for trial, but they were acquitted.
