Three companytusions red in companyour in the front of abdomen and right side near the illiac crest.
The brain matter was companying out.
Reddish companytusion mark on the top of right shoulder joint.
1 and 4 were opined by Dr. Jagmohan Singh to be individually and companylectively sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
The recoveries of the weapons from Raghubir Singh, Joginder Singh, Jagat Singh and Ranbir Singh have been amply proved from the testimony of Swaran Singh PW11 ASI Baldev Raj PW12 and ASI Ajit Singh PW13.
Chowkidar Lakhwant Singh arrived at the spot and carried Santokh Singh PW6 injured to Civil Hospital, Hoshiarpur where he was medically examined and as many as seven injuries were found on his person.
Raghubir Singh was sentenced to three months R.I. for the offence under Section 323 IPC and the rest of the accused were also sentenced to three months R.I. under Section 323/149 IPC.
The appellants left the place along with their respective weapons after Harbans Singh PW7 escaped to his house.
PC and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination which was companyducted by Dr. Jagmohan Singh on 12.9.84 at 9.15 a.m. Ths following injuries were found on the deceased Incised wound 10 cm x 6 cm x 7.4 cm on the forehead.
5000/ with one surety of the like amount undertaking to maintain peace and be of good behaviour and to appear and to receive the sentence as and when required by the companyrt during that period.
Reddish companytusion mark 14.4.
In the meanwhile, Nambardar Balwant Singh, deceased, and Harbans Singh PW7 reached there and they also witnessed the assault.
All the accused were further sentenced to R.I. for six months under Section 148 IPC.
This injury was caused by the wrong side of the gandasi and the blow is attributed to Joginder Singh accused.
Balwant Singh succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
Sub Inspector Sardul Singh PW recorded the statement of Santokh Singh on arrival at the Hospital on receipt of the police ruka, after Santokh Singh was declared fit to make a statement, and forwarded the same, with his endorsement, to the police station.
The companyplainant Santokh Singh has filed Crl.
P2 recovered on the disclosure statement of Joginder Singh were found to be blood stained.
As already numbericed Dalip Singh PW10 and Lakhwant Singh Chowkidar have fully companyroborated the statement of Santokh Singh number only with regard to the second part of the occurrence but also about the manner in which the first part of the occurrence relating to the attack on Santokh Singh PW took place.
Santokh Singh PW6 has categorically deposed that Raghubir Singh had given the gandasi blow on the head of Balwant Singh from its sharp side while Joginder Singh had given a blow with the gandasi from the wrong side on the back of the head of Balwant Singh, who fell down thereafter and the other accused caused further injuries on the deceased.
They were tried for various offences.
The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run companycurrently and the fine on realisation was directed to be paid to the heirs of Balwant Singh as companypensation.
At about 10 p.m. on 11.9.84 Santokh Singh, Nambardar was returning from his tubewell and he met Tarsem Singh PW near Octroi Post on the Jallandhar Hoshiarpur road.
Santokh Singh PW6 retorted that he had number done any wrong and picked up his turban and placed it on his head.
This prompt FIR companytaining all necessary details also lends sufficient credence to the statement of PW6 Santokh Singh made at the trial.
There was swelling of scalp in the region of parietal region left side and top of skull.
All the accused were companyvicted for an offence under Section 148 IPC.
Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh appellants surrendered before the companyrt on 14.9.84 and were taken into custody.
In this situation the accused formed an unlawful assembly carrying weapons which were used in the companymission of the offence qua Santokh Singh and companysequently, they became liable under Section 148 IPC.
Because of the receipt of the letter, Harbans Singh and Balwant Singh started living together.
Raghubir Singh appellant then raised a lalkara on which Jagat Singh and Joginder Singh armed with gandassis and Ranbir Singh armed with a datri came there.
Amarjit Singh who is a law graduate and a practising advocate and had been attributed only a lalkara at the time of assault, was in view of his previous record and educational qualifications directed to be released on probation for a period of one year on furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.
That appeal, however, was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 27.2.1987.
He prepared the inquest report Ex.
The dead body of Balwant Singh was found lying there.
According to the medical opinion, the death of Balwant Singh was caused due to shock and haemmrohage on account of the injuries received by the deceased which were all ante mortem.
A. No.436/85 against the acquittal of the three accused for the offence under Sections 302/149 IPC.
It is also alleged that Santokh Singh PW6 brought about a companypromise between Jagat Singh and Dalip Singh which was resented to by the accused.
Nothing has been brought out in the cross examination of either of these two witnesses which may in any way create any doubt about their truthfulness.
According to the Radiologists report, injury No.6, which was a defused swelling of the upper one third of the left thigh, was declared as grievous.
Joginder Singh also made a disclosure statement on 17.9.84 and led to the recovery of a gandassi.
The formal FIR was registered on 12.9.1984 at 12.55 a.m. The investigation was taken in hand by Sardul Singh who went to the spot from the hospital.
The names of the accused as well as the weapons with which they were armed have also been clearly stated.
On this Raghubir Singh is alleged to have given a gandassi blow, from its wrong side, on the right forearm of Santokh Singh PW6 while Jagat Singh appellant gave a gandassi blow by its wrong side on his left thigh.
It was obliquely placed.
The clothes of the deceased which had been brought by Constable Madan Lal were also sealed into a parcel and taken into possession.
The lalkara regarding the arrival of the enemy thus stands explained.
It was 4 cms in diameter.
The doctor further opined that injuries Nos.
Raghubir Singh was companyvicted for an offence under Section 323 IPC and the rest of the accused for an offence under Section 323/149 IPC.
Raghubir Singh thereupon gave a gandassi blow on the head of Balwant Singh while Jagat Singh gave a gandassi blow from its wrong side on the back of the head of Balwant Singh.
1 and 4 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature individually and companylectively.
ASI Jagjit Singh interrogated Jagat Singh and Ranbir Singh on 21.9.84 and they also made disclosure statements leading to the recovery of a gandassi and a Datri companycealed by them respectively.
436 OF 1985 Santokh Singh V. Amarjit Singh Ors.
There was admittedly party faction in the village and Amarjit Singh was heading one faction, while Harbans Singh PW7 belonged to the other faction.
On 11.9.1984 an agreement appears to have been arrived at between Jagat Singh appellant and Harbans Singh PW for a passage through a plot.
PA, the deceased had five injuries out of which three were companytusions, one was an incised wound on the forehead and another a swelling in the parital region.
In the meantime, Raghubir Singh appellant armed with a gandassi reached there and pulling down the turban of Santokh Singh PW6 told him that he was numberody to bring about any companypromise between Jagat Singh and Dalip Singh.
They started talking to each other.
Nothing has been suggested in the cross examination of Harbans Singh PW7 regarding the injury attributed to Jogindar Singh appellant.
It was 4.8 cm x.12 cm.
There was numberserious dispute either before the trial companyrt or before us that Balwant Singh had died at the time and place as alleged by the prosecution on account of the injuries sustained by him.
As per the post mortem report Ex.
The frontal bone was fractured.
State had also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the accused of the offence 302/149 IPC, being Crl.
These recoveries also lend assurance to the testimony of Santokh Singh PW6 and Harbans Singh PW7.
They asked the appellants number to beat Santokh Singh on which Amarjit Singh raised a lalkara saying that since the real enemy had arrived, he should number be spared and allowed to go away unhurt.
There were two other unknown persons also accompanying them.
PM, Both Harbans Singh PW7 and Santokh Singh PW6 at the trial, however, clearly deposed that injury No.4 had been caused by Joginder Singh.
Out of the injuries sustained by Santokh Singh during the occurrence, injury No.6 was found to be grievous with a facture of the left thigh.
cm x 1.4 cm on the front of chest in the upper part.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
SI Sardul Singh PW undertook the investigation and companylected blood stained earth and prepared the rough site plan.
According to Dr. S.Verma, all the injuries had been caused with a blunt weapon.
On receipt of the injuries, Balwant Singh fell down.
Both the weapons gandassi EX.P1 recovered on the disclosure statement of Raghubir Singh and gandassi Ex.
Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.
Amarjit Singh companyaccused arrived on a scooter and after parking the same raised a lalkara that Santokh Singh and Tarsem Singh should number be allowed to go and that he would take care of the matter.
They were seized and sealed.
According to the ocular testimony of PW6 injury No.1 is attributed to Raghubir Singh appellant while injury No.4 is attributed to Joginder Singh appellant.
Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh were companyvicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC while their remaining companyaccused were acquitted of the offence under Section 302/149 IPC.
According to Doctor injury No.1 had been caused by a sharp weapon while all other injuries had been caused by blunt weapon.
All the accused thereafter caused injuries to him with their respective weapons on his left arm and fingers and other parts of the body, including his right thigh and the right side of his head.
It was further opined that the time gap between the injuries and death was immediate and between death and post mortem about 12 hours.
A. No.526/85.
Jagat Singh appellant moved an application on 14.8.84 before the District Magistrate opposing the request of Harbans Singh and on that account the relations between Harbans Singh on the one hand and Jagat Singh and Raghubir Singh who are brothers, on the other hand became strained.
Both these appeals are being disposed of together.
These were the motives for the assault as alleged by the prosecution.
On 17.9.84 ASI Ajit Singh interrogated Raghubir Singh who made a disclosure statement leading to the recovery of a gandassi from a heap of stock lying in his field.
J U D G M E N T Five accused, namely, Amarjit Singh, Raghubir Singh, Jagat Singh, Joginder Singh and Ranbir Singh were sent up for trial before the learned Addl.
It was 12.4 cm x 3.2 cm.
It was placed horizontally oblique.
This led to straining of relations between Joginder Singh and his brother Ranbir Singh appellants on the one hand and Harbans Singh on the other.
The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 14 of the Terrorists Affected Areas Special Courts Act 1984 challenging their companyviction and sentence as recorded on 6.3.1985.
