On 17.8.1985, at about 2.30 p.m., Gurdial Kaur was sitting on a company near her house.
However, the petition filed by Mithu Singh, the appellant has been entertained and leave granted.
She fell down on the company and died immediately.
On trial the Session Judge, Bhatinda found both the accused persons guilty of the offences charged.
They were chased by some villagers.
Special leave petitions were filed by both of them before this companyrt.
The allegation that Bharpur Singh and Mithu Singh belong to one party faction, is number based on any companycrete fact wherefrom such an inference may be drawn by the companyrt and, therefore, does number go beyond being merely a ipse dixit of the witnesses.
Both the accused persons preferred appeals before the High Court of Punjab which have been dismissed.
The two accused persons JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ each armed with a .12 bore pistol came to the house of JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ Gurdial Kaur.
Mukhtiar Singh, PW.11, lodged an F.I.R. The usual investigation followed and the accused persons were challaned.
On 19.7.1991 the SLP filed by Bharpur Singh was directed to be dismissed by this companyrt.
The enemity so erupted had also resulted in some criminal litigation between the parties.
Therefore, the question arises, whether an inference, as to Mithu Singh having shared a companymon intention to cause the death of deceased Gurdial Kaur with the companyaccused Bharpur Singh, can be drawn?
You have already harassed us enough .
At the worst Mithu Singh, accused appellant, knew that his companyaccused Bharpur Singh was armed with a pistol.
On way, they were joined by some police party also.
According to the prosecution, Gurdial Kaur, the deceased, is said to have executed a sale deed of a piece of JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ land in favour of late Gurdev Singh, the father of accused JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ Bharpur Singh.
Finding the police and the village people chasing them, the two accused persons turned and started running in directions opposite to each other.
Mukhtiar Singh, PW.11, who has a house adjoining the house of Gurdial Kaur and one Jagtar Singh saw the incident.
From his possession, a pistol, Exhibit P 6 was recovered.
Bharpur Singh fired a shot with his pistol hitting the deceased on her left flank.
The knowledge of previous enemity existing between Bharpur Singh and the deceased can also be attributed to Mithu Singh.
The party led by ASI Gurcharan Singh apprehended Mithu Singh, appellant.
Civil litigation for cancellation of the sale deed was pending between Gurdial Kaur and accused Bharpur Singh and his brothers.
But there is numberhing available on record to draw an inference that the companyaccused Bharpur Singh had gone to the house of the deceased with the intention of causing her death and such intention was known to Mithu Singh, much less shared by him.
Thus, admittedly, there were strained relations between Bharpur Singh and the deceased, Gurdial Kaur.
Tu Sanu Bohat Tang Kita Hai Old lady be strong.
Each of them was sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/ under Section 302/34, I.P.C. They were also sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment each under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
However, the party led by Sub Inspector Santokh Singh, PW.12 caught hold of Bharpur Singh.
In view of unlicensed pistols having been recovered from each one of them they were also charged under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
C. Lahoti, J. LITTTTTTTJ Mithu Singh, the accused appellant, and one Bharpur Singh were tried on charge under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for the murder of Gurdial Kaur on 17.8.1985 at Village Bhame Kalan, District Bhatinda.
They raised an alarm whereupon the two accused persons took to their heels.
