VIRENDER PAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.1998, appellants Virender Pal @ Neelu, Sat Pal @ Pappu, Sanjay Sharma, Brij Pal @ Karate and Jitender @ Vickey as also one Raj Kumar @ Raju who died during the pendency of the appeal filed by him have been convicted for the offence of having murdered Surender @ Buddha (hereinafter referred to as the "Deceased"), for which offence they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine in sum of '5,000/- each; in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Appellant Sat Pal has also been convicted for the offence of having attempted to murder Arvind, for which offence he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay fine in sum of '2,000/-; in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 months. Appellants Sat Pal, Virender and Brij Pal have also been convicted for the offence of having been in possession of firearms in contravention of Section 5 of Arms Act 1959, for which offence they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. Co-accused Raj Kumar has also been convicted for the offence of having possessed firearms in contravention of Section 5 of Arms Act 1959, for which he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year. It may be noted that Raj Kumar died during the pendency of the appeal and hence qua him the appeal filed by him stood disposed of as having abated.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that Hari Om, son of Om Prakash PW-16, was involved in the murder of Gurcharan Singh, an associate of appellant Sat Pal, due to which reason Sat Pal was inimically disposed towards the family of Om Prakash. On 14.07.1993 at about 07.45 P.M. appellants and Raj Kumar came to the street where the house of Om Prakash was located and inflicted 19 stab wounds with knives and daggers on the body of the deceased, second son of Om Prakash, and fled. Om Prakash PW-16, the father of the deceased had witnessed the incident.

(3.) Needless to state the case of the prosecution hinged upon the veracity and credibility of Om Prakash PW-16.