LAJO Vs. SLIKHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The widow of Lal Chand, who was killed in the incident which took place on 28-6-1985 and in respect of which six accused including respondent No. 1 to 5 were tried in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra in Sessions Case No. 5/1 Add of 1986/Session Trial No. 25 of 1986, has filed these appeals, as respondent Nos. 1 to 5 have been acquitted by the High Court.

(2.) Lal Chand deceased and his brother Ram Sarup claimed to be in possession of Khasra No. 24/21. The prosecution case was that on 28-6-1985 at about 5.00 p.m. while Lal Chand and his brother Ram Sarup and his wife P.W. 6 Ishro were in the field, Sukhdev Singh, respondent No. 1 along with other accused came there and started ploughing the land. When Lal Chand tried to presuade them not to plough the land, Sukhdev Singh fired a shot from his double barrel gun and caused injuries to Lal Chand. Thereafter other accused assaulted Ram Sarup, Ishro and others who came to their rescue and caused injuries to them also. The trial Court relying upon the evidence of P.W. 4 Ram Sarup, P.W. 6, Ishro, and P.W. 7 Nirmal Singh convicted Sukhdev Singh for the offence of murder and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 for the offence punishable under Section 323, IPC. Respondent No. 5 Sukhwinder Kaur was also convicted under Section 325, IPC.

(3.) All the convicted accused challenged their conviction before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court on reappreciation of the evidence came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish that Lal Chand and his son were put into possession of the field and that they were, in fact, in possession of the same on the date of the incident. The High Court also found that the eye-witnesses had not given a correct account of the version as they had failed to explain the injuries which were found on the accused. The accused Harvinder Singh had as many as 5 injuries on his person and accused Ajit Singh had a fracture of his arm. The High Court also found that the defence version that Sukhdev Singh was in possession and that on the fateful day when he was ploughing the land, Lal Chand, Ram Sarup, Ishro and Rulia Ram had gone to their field with ghandasis and attacked Harvinder Singh and thereupon accused Sukhdev Singh had fired a shot from his double barrel gun in exercise of right of private defence was more acceptable.