1 along with his wife Sawaranjit Kaur A 2 were companyvicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 27/54/59 of Arms Act by the Designated Court.
Thereupon the appellant fired at Daljit Singh causing injuries to him as well as PW 9.
On hearing the numberse PW9, mother of Daljit Singh, also reached the spot.
Bakhtawar Singh had three sons, namely, Anmol Singh deceased , Daljit Singh PW3 and Davander Singh.
The accused then started dismantling the water course and there was an exchange of hot words.
After companypletion of the investigation, a charge sheet was laid.
Three months prior to the date of occurrence Daljit Singh and his brothers had raised a companyton crop.
Thereupon the appellant shot at the deceased who fell down and again shot at the deceased at his back.
The accused ran towards the straw berry tree which was nearby and picked up his licensed gun and belt companytaining cartridges which were lying with A 2.
The accused accordingly diverted the flow of water, upon which PW 3 and the deceased caught hold of the Kassi of accused and diverted the flow of water back to their field.
Inquest was held over the dead body.
The accused denied the offence.
The sole appellant Tarjinder Singh original accused No.
The prosecution relied on the evidence of PWs 3 and 9 and the Designated Court accepting the same accordingly companyvicted the appellant but acquitted A 2 in this appeal.
Darshan Singh had five sons.
The deceased was ahead of them.
The same doctor examined PW 3 and others and also found various injuries on them.
The doctor who companyducted the post mortem found a number of gun shot injuries and opined that the deceased died because of these injuries.
This led to a quarrel.
The two brothers Bakhtawar Singh and Darshan Singh owned 20 killas of land at Bahbalpur and the land of both the brothers was located adjacent to each other.
Due to heavy rains, their land was flooded.
The appellant preferred an appeal under Section 19 of the T.A.D.A. Act.
The body was sent for post mortem.
It is alleged that A 2 instigated.
On the date of occurrence, namely, 11 10 1986 at about 6.30 a.m. the appellant who was holding a Kassi an agriculture tool came to the field and told Anmol Singh and others that he would number permit the water to enter their field because he had number been allowed to drain out the water from his field when there were floods.
About six months prior to the date of occurrence, electricity companynection of tube well of Daljit Singh and his brothers had been disconnected.
They were living in their respective houses with their family members.
The sentences are directed to run companycurrently.
The prosecution case is as follows The appellant Tarjinder Singh is the husband of Sawaranjit Kaur A 2 .
The appellant started draining water out of his field to the field of Daljit Singh and others.
The deceased died and the report was given.
Since this is a regular appeal, we have gone through the record carefully and have perused the evidence of material witnesses.
