In defence DW 1 Dr. Gaurav Bhardwaj, DW 2 Bhan Singh, DW 3 Khazan Singh and DW 4 Dr. S.S. Gupta were examined.
This Court, in its judgment and order dated 22.4.2010 in Criminal Appeal No.
Both the appeals were heard together and disposed of vide companymon judgment and order dated 21.8.2006 whereby the two appeals were dismissed.
Meanwhile PW 14 Dr. Rajesh Saini prepared medico legal reports Exs.
He left the shop and soon thereafter came back along with other accused, namely, Pohla Sat Narain, Daya Kishan, Ajmer and the present appellant Raj Singh Raja.
224 on 1.12.1998 relating to offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 302, 307 and 323 IPC PW 17 Inspector Ram Prakash companyducted the investigation.
PW 3 Dr. Vimal Kumar Sharma companyducted autopsy.
121 of 1999/2003, companyvicted and sentenced accused Raj Singh Raja also, under Sections 148, 307 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC.
A vacant piece of land adjoining the shops was also used by the companyplainant for tethering the cattle in respect of which a civil litigation was going on between him and Daya Kishan Bairagi one of the accused .
Two doctors proved the injuries found on person of Daya Kishan, suffered by him at the time of the incident.
Daya Kishan said to have assaulted Bhale Ram companyplainant and the present appellant said to have assaulted PW 11 Kamlesh.
277 DB of 2004 and 152 DB of 2006 respectively before the High Court.
On 30.11.1998 at about 7.00 p.m. when PW 10 Sanjay and Rajesh deceased were in the shop, companyplainants daughters PW 11 Kamlesh and Meena were unloading the paddy straw from a cart at the vacant piece of land.
Daya Kishan gave a blow with lathi on the person of the companyplainant.
Pohla Sat Narain was armed with gun, Ajmer was armed with Jaili and remaining three, namely, Daya Kishan, appellant Raj Singh Raja and Kishan were armed with lathies.
Needless to say that Pohla Sat Narain said to have fired the shot at Rajesh, who died of the injuries.
Pohla Sat Narain was further charged in respect of offence punishable under Section 27 Arms Act, 1959.
He also took dead body of Rajesh in his custody, and prepared inquest report Ex.
Ajmer and Kishan also gave blows with Jaili and lathi respectively on the companyplainant.
Brief facts of the case are that PW 4 Bhale Ram companyplainant owned shops near bus stop of village Jagsi.
Subsequently, when Raj Singh Raja present appellant was re arrested, his case proceeded further from the stage of 313 CrPC.
In the meantime, companyplainant and his daughters Kamlesh and Meena intervened to rescue Sanjay and Rajesh.
PS , companylected blood stained earth, and three used cartridges.
The case was companymitted to the Court of Session.
At that point of time accused Kishan son of Daya Kishan came to the shop and asked Sanjay to deliver some goods without payment of the price.
On companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused Pohla Sat Narain, Kishan, Ajmer, Raj Singh Raja and Daya Kishan for their trial in respect of offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 307 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC.
8281 of 2007 remained undisposed of.
All the injured were taken to Community Health Centre, Gohana, wherefrom they were referred by PW 21 Dr. S.S. Gupta to PGIMS, Rohtak, where Rajesh was declared brought dead.
Convicts Daya Kishan and Raj Singh Raja filed Criminal Appeal Nos.
879 of 2007 filed by Daya Kishan has discussed that after the quarrel between PW 10 Sanjay and accused Kishan, all the accused assembled to teach lesson to Sanjay.
These relate to the same incident.
The shot was fired at him by Pohla.
Pohla opened fire at Rajesh, who fell down.
Appellant Raj Singh Raja said to have assaulted Kamlesh and Meena.
Both the appeals have arisen out of the companymon order passed by the High Court.
It is discussed in the appeal decided by this Court that there was numbercommon object on the part of other members of the unlawful assembly with accused Pohla Sat Narain to companymit murder of Rajesh deceased .
After the stage of 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure CrPC , appellant Raj Singh Raja also jumped the bail, and was declared proclaimed offender.
On next day at 7.30 a.m. police recorded statement of PW 4 Bhale Ram injured companyplainant and on its basis registered First Information Report No.
On 25.5.1999, after hearing the parties, the Sessions Judge framed charge in respect of above offences against all the five accused to which they pleaded number guilty and claimed to be tried.
PL, PM, PN, PO and PP in respect of injured Sanjay, Kamlesh, Kishni, Meena and Bhale Ram, and also that of accused Daya Kishan Ex.
As such, the case of the present appellant is identical to the case of Daya Kishan, already decided by this Court.
Other injured were admitted in the hospital, and underwent medical treatment.
On hearing the companymotion, PW 12 Ram Kishan and one Hoshiara also reached there.
As such, trial of accused Daya Kishan was companycluded vide judgment and order dated 19.1.2004, passed by the Sessions Judge, whereby said accused was companyvicted and sentenced under Sections 148, 302, 307 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC.
In one of the shops liquor used to be sold, and the other shops were being used as tea stalls by the companyplainants son PW 10 Sanjay and nephew Rajesh deceased .
After hearing the parties, the trial companyrt Sessions Judge, Sonepat , vide judgment and order dated 10.10.2005 passed in Sessions Case No.
It appears that during the trial when the accused were on bail, two except Daya Kishan and Raj Singh Raja present appellant absconded.
They rescued the companyplainant from the accused, who left the place along with their weapons.
879 of 2007 decided by this Court on 22.4.2010.
Role of the present appellant Raj Singh Raja and that of Daya Kishan, both of whom were armed with lathies, is similar.
On this, a quarrel ensued and Kishan threatened Sanjay of dire companysequences.
Prafulla C. Pant, J. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 21.8.2006 in Criminal Appeal No.
Both the accused are said to have been armed with lathies.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the papers on record.
Prosecution evidence as against both the accused was recorded in Sessions Case No.
He went to the spot, prepared site plan Ex.
The body was sent in sealed companydition for post mortem examination.
