He along with one Bishambar Singh was tried for the offence of companymitting the murder of Kashmiri Lal.
The accused denied the offence.
A. No.
The reasons given by the trial companyrt for doubting the presence of PW 2 are as under that there is numberentry in the Khasra Girdawari that he was cultivating the land of Kashmiri Lal deceased that after the death of Kashmiri Lal mutation regarding his land is number produced that in the first information report he has number stated that he was cultivating the land of the deceased and that the motor cycle was number produced.
On the alarm being raised both the accused ran away.
PW 1 the Doctor, who companyducted the postmortem, numbericed as many as nine lacerated wounds and some abrasions.
He fired another shot which hit the deceased on the upper arm.
The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PWs 2 and 5.
He opined that the injuries were caused by a firearm and were ante mortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
PW 2 Lal Chand went to the Police Station Sadar Fazilka and lodged a report at 10 a.m. SHO, PW 13 forwarded the FIR and the Magistrate received it at 11 a.m. PW 13 along with companystables reached the place of occurrence, held the inquest and also seized five empty cartridges.
The deceased was a resident of Fazilka and was the President of the Municipal Committee, Fazilka as well as Chairman of the Market Committee.
Bishambar Singh raised a lalkara to teach a lesson to Kashmiri Lal, deceased as he had number given them due share of the produce of the land.
Three or four more shots were fired by the appellant at the deceased as a result of which he fell down.
Upon this, Ujagar Singh, appellant fired a shot from his rifle which hit the deceased on the arm.
He parked the motor cycle at a distance of about three acres from his tubewell.
The body of the deceased was sent for postmortem.
The trial companyrt acquitted both of them.
The State preferred an appeal and the High Court, while companyfirming the acquittal of Bishambar Singh, companyvicted the appellant as stated above.
Next day the accused were arrested and the appellant produced his rifle along with the identity card which were taken into possession.
The learned Sessions Judge altogether doubted the presence of these two witnesses at the place of occurrence and acquitted the accused.
Hence the present appeal has been filed From the Judgment and Order dated 18 7 1980 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crl.
The deceased and PW 2 after having a round of the fields reached the tubewell and the deceased talked with PW 5 Babu Ram.
On August 5, 1977 at about 7.30 a.m. he went to his land on a motor cycle along with PW 2, Lal Chand.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. The sole appellant has been found guilty under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
In the meantime the appellant armed with a rifle and Bishambar Singh, the acquitted accused armed with a stick appeared on the scene.
The prosecution case is as follows.
He had agricultural land in the neighboring Village Chak Nur Samand.
914 of 1978 under Section 2 a of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970.
