DARBARA SINGH WAZIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are directed against the judgment and order of May 15, 1981 passed by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 419-DB of 1981.

(2.) The appellants are three in number. They are Wazir Singh, his nephew Darbara Singh and share-cropper (seeri) Dalip Singh. These three, together with Mohinder Singh the brother of Wazir Singh and father of Darbara Singh, as also one Avtar Singh, Wazir Singh's father-in-law's brother, stood trial before the Sessions Judge, Bhiwani for offences under Ss. 141, 302, 149 and 323 / 149, I.P.C. for having caused the murder of Sadha Singh paternal cousin of Wazir Singh and Mohinder Singh accused, as also to have caused simple hurts to Ranjit Singh, P.W. 4 sister's son of the deceased. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted Avatar Singh taking the view that since the Investigating Officer could not recover the gun, the weapon of offence, from him in spite of interrogation, his name had been introduced by the prosecution in order to complete the alleged unlawful assembly, convenient and handy as it was because of relationship with deceased. Avtar Singh was attributed no part in the actual occurrence except exhortations. The remaining four accused were convicted under Ss. 302/34 and 323/34, I.P.C. and were sentenced to life imprisonment and six months rigorous imprisonments respectively. In appeal the High Court acquitted M ohinder Singh accused taking the view that though he was stated to have used his kirpan with force, the medical evidence did not corroborate this version because Dr. B. M. Kapur, P.W. 2 who performed the autopsy of the deceased, opined that the injuries which apparently were kirpan injuries could only be caused by the tip of the kirpan suggesting that much force had not been used. The High Court then went on to agree with the opinion of Dr. Kapur to say that all the incised wounds on the deceased could I have been caused by Kulhari EX.PI. This kulhari was suggested to have been used by Wazir Singh appellant towards commission of the crime. On that premise the High Court let off Mohinder Singh recording the opinion that his participation was doubtful. For lack of corroboration of medical evidence the High Court also observed that it was quite probable that like Avtar Singh, acquitted co-accused, Mohinder Singh accused too had been brought in as an accused. As a result the three appellants remained convicted and sentenced. So they are here before us.

(3.) Criminal Appeal No. 714 of 1981 was preferred by Ranjit Singh complainant against acquitted co-accused Mohinder Singh but this appeal was dismissed by us on 8-41992 for non-prosecution because learned counsel for that appellant stated that he had no instructions. So Mohinder Singh remained acquitted.