MANBIR ALIAS MANNU ALIAS BABUJI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS laid in the challan, prosecution alleged against the appellants that they are brothers and deceased Sukhbir @ Kallu was their cousin. (Not to be confused with appellant Vijay Kumar also called Kallu). That deceased used to behave inappropriately with Urmila wife of appellant Manbir and on an earlier occasion had tried to molest her and for which reason he was declared a persona non-grata in the house of the On 5th August 1997, Sukhbir came to house of appellants. Harbans Lal (PW-6) which was on the same street on which house of appellant was constructed and the purpose of the visit was to discuss with Harbans Lal the terms on which the deceased would give on hire a bus with respect to the marriage of the son of Harbans Lal. At that time, wife of appellant Manbir i.e. Urmila reached and questioned why Sukhbir had entered their street and left to return with appellant Manbir who was armed with a lathi, but was persuaded to go back and returned within minutes with a lathi in hand and his brother Vijay Kumar in company, who inflicted knife blows on Sukhbir. After inflicting knife blows the two fled. Sukhbir died as a result of the knife injuries received before he could be rendered any medical assistance. The incident was stated to have been witnessed by Sahib Singh PW-4, who had a shop in his house on the street as also by Satish Kumar (PW-5) and Harbans Lal.

(2.) NEEDLESS to state, at the trial, Sahib Singh, Satish Kumar and Harbans Lal were produced as eye-witnesses and Urmila wife of appellant Manbir was produced as a witness to prove the motive for the crime; and as was expected, Urmila did not support the case of the prosecution; the reason obviously being her compulsion to weaken the case of the prosecution and save her husband.

(3.) HARBANS Lal PW-6 has deposed by way of examination-in-chief on 29.1.1998 and his examination-in-chief reads as under:-