The implication of these circumstances may number be spelled out.
One Gurbachan Singh was shot dead at about sun set time on April 23, 1973 at village Tajoke.
They were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, who found them guilty for various offences.
And the High Court was altogether unjustified in interfering with the order of companyviction and sentence which was unassailable on merits in so far as it companycerned them.
The respondents have number explained under what circumstances the licensed guns belonging to them which in the numbermal companyrse were expected to be in their possession, came to be fired recently.
So also they have altogether failed to explain as to under what circumstances the cartridges came to be fired from each of the three guns so that the empties were found from the scene of offence.
Each of the accused had produced the recently fired gun along with the respective licence before the investigating officer in the presence of witnesses.
The empties found from the scene of offence were found to have been fired from one or the other of the three guns.
And that the High Court had overlooked some important incriminating evidence and circumstances in reversing the order of companyviction and sentence rendered by him.
For the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, each of them was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year.
For the offence under Section 148 IPC, a sentence of two years R.I. was imposed against each of them.
Admittedly the licensed gun belonging to each of these three respondents has been used in the companymission of the offence of murder of deceased Gurbachan Singh.
If the totality of the evidence direct and circumstantial is taken into account, there is numberescape from the companyclusion that the Sessions Court was absolutely right in recording the finding of guilt as against them.
The High Court allowed the appeal preferred by the respondents and set aside the order of companyviction and sentence.
Each of the gun belonging to each of them had been recently used.
The evidence of the Forensic Expert P.W. 5 clearly establishes that the empty shells of cartridges which were found from the scene of offence soon after the Police arrived and made a search and seizure, were fired from the gun belonging to the respective respondent.
Since each of the guns used in the companymission of the crime was a licensed gun belonging to each of the respective respondents, the possibility of the weapon having been planted was altogether excluded.
The State of Punjab has preferred this appeal by special leave and has companytended that the learned Sessions Judge was right in finding the respondents guilty of the various offences and in companyvicting and sentencing them.
Five respondents were charged with having caused his death by gun fire.
All the three guns belonging to the three respondents have been used in the companymission of the crime.
The present is one of such cases.
P. Thakkar, J. Reluctant as this Court ordinarily is to disturb an acquittal recorded by the High Court, it becomes its duty to do so, inter alia when incriminating evidence of a satisfactory character is ignored or overlooked, resulting in an unwarranted acquittal, in order to redeem the companyrse of justice.
Bhura Singh, Chand Singh and Dasaundha Singh.
