HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judg­ment dated 3-6-2002 passed by the then Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, at Rudrapur, convicting and sen­tencing the accused-appellant to impris­onment for life under Section 302 I.RC. read with Section 149 I.RC.

(2.) WRITTEN report, Ext. Ka.l of the incident was delivered by the inform­ant-eye witness, Jeet Singh (PW.l) at P.S., Rudrapur at 5.05 A.M. on 13-2-1987 regarding the incident which took place at his house in village Srirampur at about 1.30 - 2.00 A.M. in the night between 12/13-2-1987 and on its ba­sis check F.I.R., Ext.Ka.2 was drawn and relevant G.D. entry was made to register case crime No. 48/1987 under Sections 147,148,149, 302, 307 I.RC. against the accused-appellant Harbhajan Singh and four other co-ac­cused Subeg Sirtgh, Seesha Singh, Gurumukh Singh and Darshan Singh. As per the narrative of the written re­port, the prosecution case is : Accused Harbhajan Singh is the younger brother of informant Jeet Singh. Their relations were not cordial due to dispute of partition of landed property. Both the brothers reside in separate houses in village Srirampur whereas their father Didar Singh was residing in village Kartarpur of Police Station, Bilaspur, District Rampur along with three other younger brothers of the informant. Marriage of younger sister and younger brother of the informant and the accused were solemnized in vil­lage Kartarpur on 6th and 8th Febru­ary respectively. Informant went to vil­lage Kartarpur to participate in the mar­riage festivities along with his wife and children about 15 days ago and a co-villager Kulwant Singh (RW.3) was then asked by the informant to take care of the cattle and house of the informant in his absence.

(3.) INFORMANT thereafter raised alarm attracting the village people to the place of the incident whereupon all the five culprits including the accused Harbhajan Singh fled away towards south of the village. At this stage wit­nesses Harjinder Singh and Kulwant Singh came out of the thatch claiming that the incident had been witnessed by them while they remained inside the thatch due to fear of being killed by the accused and others.