SHINGARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are preferred by the appellant, Shinghara Singh against the judgments made in Criminal Appeal Nos. 19 (DB) of 1980 and 20 (DB) of 1980 on the file of the High court of Punjab and Haryana at chandigarh. The facts of the case which led to the filing of these two appeals can be summarised as follows: before the trial court, this appellant along with 8 others took his trial under seven charges on the allegations that on 20/04/1979 he along with other accused formed an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of the common object of such assembly, he caused the death of the deceased Dharam Singh and also accused caused injuries to several witnesses.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the deceased Dharam Singh along with Public Witness 14 (Harnam Singh) , Public Witness 10, (Anoop Singh) and Public Witness 8 (Sarup singh) was in possession of four killas of panchayat land which was the scene of occurrence. Accused 9 before the trial court, namely, Gurdit singh and the rest of the accused, namely, the appellant (A1 and A2 to a8 were in possession of an adjoining four killas of panchayat land and they wanted to take forcible possession of the panchayat lands which was in possession of the deceased Dharam Singh and others. The deceased and others had ploughed their land about 2 or 3 days before the occurrence. In the morning of the fateful day, the appellant and other accused went to the land to re-plough the same land. On receipt of an information, the deceased and other injured prosecution witnesses, namely, PWs 8 to 13 proceeded to the land and on the way PWs 9 and 14 also joined them. They all reached the land by about 9 a. m. Accused 4, 5, 6 and 8 were ploughing the field whilst accused 2, 3 and 7 were standing, each armed with a rifle. The appellant Singhara Singh (Al) was armed with 'barachhi'. Gurdit Singh (A9 was sitting nearby unarmed. On reaching the scene, the deceased asked the accused persons as to why they were ploughing his land and asked him to stop further ploughing. Suddenly, a4, A5, A6 and A8 who were armed with gandasa, dang, barchhi and sua respectively on a lalkara raised by A9 shouting that the deceased party should be taught a lesson started attacking the complainant's party. The appellant herein gave a barchhi blow on the nose of the deceased dharam Singh. On receipt of the injury, he (the deceased) fell down. Thereupon, accused 8 gave a sua blow on the left side shoulder of the deceased. Again appellant 1 gave another barchhi blow on his right leg while A8 gave another sua blow on his right chest. When Public Witness 13 (Charan singh) went near the deceased, accused 2 fired a rifle shot hitting him on his right shoulder. He also fell down. Thereupon after attacking Public Witness 9 and other witnesses, they all took to their heels. The deceased Dharam singh and the injured persons were brought to the house of the deceased. On reaching the house, Dharam Singh expired. Thereafter all the injured persons were taken to the hospital and treated. On the complainant given by Public Witness 8 (Sarup Singh) , the case was registered and the investigation proceeded.

(3.) The appellant took two trials i. e. for the offence of murder and other allied offences along with others and another individually for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Trial court in S. T. No. 45 of 1979 on the evidence adduced by the prosecution found that the physical possession of the land was with the complainant's party and concluded as follows: