Bhupinder Singh went to the village Jheetha to inform Gurdev Singh, the father of Rajpal Singh.
on the right side of the head of Rajpal Sigh and the brain matter was companying out.
The prosecution in support of its case mainly relied upon the evidence of Bhupinder Singh P.W.2 and Nirmal Singh P.W. 3 as the witnesses of facts.
They further numbericed that the appellant and Kewal Singh A 2 were armed with rifle and a single barrel.
When they came out of the house they numbericed that the appellant and two other acquitted person were chasing Rajpal Singh while he was running towards his house.
The tubewell of the accused persons was at a distance of 1 1/2 to 2 killas from the residence of Nirmal Singh.
the defence in support of their case examined Dr. J.S. Dalal W. 1 as the ballistic expert.
The appellant.
The appellant and tow other acquitted accused persons denied the allegations levelled against them and pleaded that they have been falsely implicated at the instance of Nirmal Singh P.W. 3 who was on inimical terms with them.
The appellant being aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence passed against him under Section 302 IPC has filed this appeal by Special Leave.
The appellant was also companyvicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act for having been found in possession of a 315 bore rifle belonging to his father A 1 in a separated trial and accordingly sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.
It is alleged by the prosecution that within a short time they heard a roula from the side of the tubewell of A 1 and also overhead A 1 saying that Rajpal Sing should number be allowed to escape.
The bones of the right side of the head were found missing.
The ballistic expert, however companyld number give any definite opinion about the use of bullet Ex.
12 bore gun.
ASI Chandan Singh W.10 left along with them and on reaching the place of occurrence he started the investigation.
Bhupinder Singh W.2 and Nirmal Sigh P.W.3 then reached near the place occurrence.
All the three appeals were heard together and the High Court by its judgment and order dated April 30, 1978 dismissed all the appeals.
PD/1 was recorded.
Nirmal Singh and the father of Rajpal sing then left for the police station, Zira and upon reaching there during night at about 12.10 a.m., they lodged the report Ex.
The learned trial companyrt acquitted A 1 and A 2 which has affirmed by the High Court in the appeal preferred by the State and their acquittal is number the subject matter of challenge before us.
Rajpal Singh fell down and died on the spot.
Gurdev Singh, the father of Nirmal Singh and Rajpal Singh, Rajpal Singh proceeded to the tubewell of A 1 leaving behind Bhupinder Singh in the house of Nirmal singh.
8,000/ be paid to the next of the kin of Rajpal Singh as companypensation .
In addition to the above evidence the prosecution also relied upon spot panchnama, seizure memos, report of the ballistic experts and the medical evidence of Dr. J.S. Gujral P.W.1 .
when Rajpal Singh tried to scale over the wall and about to jump into the companypound of Nirmal Singh, the appellant fired from his rifle causing a firearm injury to Rajpal Singh, Its is further alleged by the prosecution that Kewal Singh A 2 also fired through his rifle and as a result of these fire arm injuries, the upper portion of the head of Rajpal Singh was blown off.
it is alleged by the prosecution that on June 12, 1985 at about 6.30 p.m. Bhupinder Singh P.W.2 Along with his brother Rajpal Singh since deceased came to the house of Nirmal Singh P.W.3 who happened to be the companybrother of Bhupinder Singh.
They had companye to Nirmal Singh to arrange labour for the purpose of planting paddy crop in their fields at village Jheetha.
P.D. on the basis of which a formal FIR Ex.
The autopsy on the dead body was companyducted by Dr. J.S. Gujral P.W.1 and he found a big lacerated wound 28 cms x 18 cms.
The appellant was also separately charge sheeted for an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
The State of Punjab also preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal in respect of A 1 and A 2.
The empties were forward to the ballistic expert along with the rifle which was recovered from the possession of the appellant on June 16, 1985.
P1 to P3 were seized vide seizure memo Ex.
Nirmal Singh was living with his father and other members of his family on the outskirts of his fields at a distance of about one mile from the abadi of his village Santuwala.
The Learned Sessions Judge however gave the benefit of doubt to A 1 and A 2 and acquitted them of all the charges levelled against them.
The appellant A 3 aggrieved by his companyvictions on both the e companynts preferred tow criminal appeals before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh.
P4 was also found embedded on the outer side of the well over which the deceased had scaled.
One bullet Ex.
during the spot panchnama three empty cartridges of rifle Ex.
Acchar Singh A 1 is the father of Kaval Singh A 2 and Harbhajan Singh A 3 .
P. KURDUKAR, J. The appellant along with two other acquitted accused persons was put up for trial for an offence punishable under Section 302/84 IPC for having companymitted the murder of Rajpal Singh.
They pleaded that they are innocent and be acquitted.
