ATMA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the following facts :-

(2.) In support of its case, the prosecution relied upon the evidence of PWs 1 and 2, Mal Singh, the complainant and Bhupinder Singh, the two eye-witnesses; PW.3 Dr. Aarti Singh, who had medico-legally examined Bhupinder Singh and Mohinder Singh, the two injured, and had found no fracture on their persons; PW.7 ASI Narinder Singh, who deposed with regard to the disclosure statement made by Lal Singh and recoveries made from the other accused; PW.8 Inspector Sukhdev Singh, the Investigating Officer; PW.10 Dr. Gurmanjit Singh Rai who had, on February 12, 1993, conducted the post mortem examination on the dead bodies of Dalip Kaur and Major Singh and had found 5 and 10 gun shot injuries respectively on their persons; PW.11 Dr. Sukhwinder Singh who had medico-legally examined Bhupinder Singh and Mohinder Singh, on February 15, 1993 and had found 1 and 3 injuries, respectively, on their persons; PW.13 Sub Inspector Satwant Singh, the primary Investigating Officer; PW.15 Dr. G.S. Bedi who proved the fact that Bhupinder Singh (PW.2) had been operated upon on February 12, 1993 for the gun shot injury that he had suffered; and finally PW.16 Dr. Avtar Singh Gill, who stated that Mohinder Singh son of Mal Singh had been admitted in the emergency ward on February 11, 1993 at 11.25 P.M. with a history of multiple injuries.

(3.) The prosecution case was then put to the accused and their statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They denied the allegations levelled against them and pleaded false implication. They also examined HC Ranjit Singh as DW.1 in their defence.