525 26/83 are filed by one Jasbir Singh, the companyplainant in the case.
When examined under Section 313, Cr.
Kulwant Singh, the appellant was having his licenced 12 bore gun with him and the others were armed with lathis and gandasas.
The daughter of P.W. 12 was married to P.W. 10 an advocate at Kapurthala.
After inflicting injuries on them, the four accused went back to the house of Kulwant Singh, but they were followed by the injured witnesses and the deceased Arjan Singh throwing a challenge to kill them and it was then the appellant Kulwant Singh made use of his licenced gun and fired shots by which the deceased Arjan Singh and Sukhdev Singh P.W. 13 sic were hurt.
Criminal Appeal No.
The four of the accused, namely, A l, A 4, A 5 and A 6 had some companytusions which were found to be simple.
450/ 82.
Thereafter all the accused lifted the body of the deceased to the house of Kulwant Singh.
He also extracted about 20 pellets from the body of the deceased.
Then Makhan Singh A 5 exhorted Kulwant Singh to shoot.
When the deceased Arjan Singh tried to intervene, he was hit in his chest by a shot fired by Kulwant Singh and he fell down and died.
Some recoveries were effected at the instance of some of the accused and after companypletion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid.
Kulwant Singh fired one more shot.
He proceeded with the investigation and got the injured witnesses examined and arrested the accused.
A 7 is also alleged to have given a blow with a gandasa from its blunt side.
The High Court companyvicted Kulwant Singh under Section 304, Part I, I.P.C. as stated above and acquitted the other three.
Criminal Appeal No.
All five of them started for their farm house to have dinner and they were intercepted on the way by the seven accused near the house of Kulwant Singh.
The trial Court acquitted Gurdial Singh A 2 , Bal winder Singh son of Deva Singh A 3 , Balwinder Singh son of Hans Singh A 7 and companyvicted the remaining four.
All the seven accused were differently armed.
The prosecution case is as follows The accused, the deceased Arjan Singh and the material witnesses, some of them who are injured, belong to village Fathudhinga in Kapurthala District.
Kulwant Singh A1, however, gave a statement to the effect that on the day of occurrence the PWs and the deceased attacked Makhan Singh A5 in front of his house and on this, he, A4 and A6 went for his rescue and there they were injured by the PWs and the deceased, and that he and others inflicted injuries on them in exercise of their right of private defence.
The High Court taking the defence plea set up by Kulwant Singh into companysideration and also having regard to the fact that some injuries were found on the four of the accused, observed that the prosecution has number companye out with the whole truth and in that view of the matter acquitted the other three accused, but companying to the case of Kulwant Singh, the High Court taking into companysideration his admission as well as the other surrounding circumstances, held that the offence companymitted by him would be one punishable under Section 304, Part I, I.P.C. and sentenced him to 10 years R.I. as already stated.
He also examined Sukhdev Singh P.W. 11 , Sucha Singh P.W. 12 and Amar Singh P.W. 13 sic and found several lacerated wounds and companytusions on their persons and opined that these injuries companyld have been caused by a blunt weapon.
A. Nos.
The doctor, who companyducted the post mortem on the body of the deceased Arjan Singh, found several lacerated wounds and he opined that the first eight injuries out of the ten were caused by fire arm and the rest by a blunt weapon.
525 26 of 1983 are taken on board as they are companynected matters.
450/82 is filed by one Kulwant Singh who was found guilty by the High Court under Section 304, Part I, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. Criminal Appeals Nos.
All the companyvicted four persons preferred an appeal to the High Court.
Accordingly Kulwant Singh opened fire and Sukhdev Singh received injury on his chest.
Jayachandra Reddy, J. Criminal Appeals Nos.
One Fauja Singh was killed in his in laws village Rodewala in Patiala district in the year 1966 and three of the persons belonging to that village were prosecuted and they all were companyvicted on the basis of the evidence of Amar Singh, P.W. 12 in the present case.
Questioning the acquittal of Kulwant Singh of the murder charge and companyplete acquittal of the other three namely A 4, A 5 and A 6 the companyplainant Jasbir Singh has filed Crl.
He opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage caused by multiple injuries.
He and his brother Arjan Singh, the deceased and the formers son Sukhdev Singh P.W. 13 went to meet Amar Singh P.W. 12 on 10 5 1981 at about 8.00 p.m. At that time P.W. 10 also came there.
One Sucha Singh P.W. 11 sic came on long leave on 9 5 1981.
Kulwant Singh gave a lalkara.
Kulwant Singh has preferred this Criminal Appeal No.
The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of the injured witnesses.
Then there was a clash during which the PWs received injuries.
525 26 of 1993.
Jagdish Singh who is the driver of Jasbir Singh P.W. 10 went to police station on his scooter at mid night and gave a report to the ASI P.W. 16 who reached the spot and held the inquest on the dead body of Arjan Singh which was laid inside the house of Kulwant Singh and despatched the dead body for post mortem.
450/82 The appellant in this appeal along with six others was tried for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 307 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The injured, P.W. 11, P.W. 12 and P.W. 13 were carried in a tractor to Civil Hospital at Kapurthala.
P.C. the accused pleaded number guilty.
When Sucha Singh P.W. 11 intervened, he was beaten with gandasa and Gurdial Singh A 2 gave a blow on the head of P.W. 11.
