STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. BHOLA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan. The father and son were tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. for causing the death of three persons who were no other than their family members.

(2.) According to the prosecution, on the intervening night of 25th and 26th June, 1977, Meet Singh and his son Bhagwan Singh (deceased) were sleeping on the cots. Gurdeep Kaur, wife of Bhagwan Singh, was sleeping with her mother-in-law. Punjab Kaur (deceased) in the court-yard inside the house. The two accused were also sleeping on their respective cots inside the house at some distance. It is alleged that at about 3 or 3.30 a.m. Gurdeep Kaur aroused from sleep when her husband's brother Balbir Singh (accused). struck a 'kassi' blow on the body of her mother-in-law, Punjab Kaur. P.W. 1 claimed to have seen the other accused also striking a blow on the body of Punjab Kaur with a 'Gandasa'. She tried to rescue her mother-in-law but she was pushed aside. She also claimed to have seen her father-in-law, Meet Singh and husband Bhagwan Singh being murdered by both the accused by the respective weapons. P.W. 1 raised an outcry which attracted Bhagwan Kaur who came to the place of occurrence immediately. But she was not examined. Seeing Bhagwan Kaur, the accused ran away. Further, the case of the prosecution is that on hearing cries P.Ws. 2 and 3 came there and tried to run after the accused assailants but could not overtake them. P.W. 3 is alleged to have gone to the house of Suja and informed him about the tripple murder. Suja came to the spot and he claimed that he was informed by Gurdeep Kaur (P.W. I) that the respondent-accused killed these persons. Then Suja accompanied by one Nathu rushed to the field of P.W. 5 and informed him about the occurrence. A report was given to the police. The case was registered and in the report it was mentioned that the motive on the part of the accused to commit the murders was that Balbir Singh, accused, wanted 15 bhigas of land in excess of his share from his father Meet Singh (deceased), while he was given only 10 bhigas.

(3.) The police held inquest over the three dead bodies and sent them for post-mortem. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem found three critical injuries which could have been caused by a sharp-edged weapon. The prosecution relied mainly on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3. The accused denied the offence. The trial Court accepted the prosecution case and convicted the accused and sentenced both of them to death. The convicted accused also preferred appeals. The High Court rejected the reference for confirmation of death sentence, allowed the appeals filed by the convicted accused. Hence the present appeal arises from the order of the High Court.