AMRINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 5th July, 2007 and the order of sentence of the same date, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in Sessions Case No. 42 of 2005. By aforesaid judgment and order of sentence, the accused/Appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for six months more

(3.) The short case of the prosecution is that one Gurdeep Singh (PW1) made a statement Ex.PA/1 to the effect that on 1st June, 2005 at about 8.00 A.M., he had gone to his fields and while taking out the key to the pump room the same had fallen down in the tubewell. According to PW1, when he descended into the well to take out the key he saw the dead-body of a young man in the well. PW1 informed the matter to one Jagjit Singh who is the son of the Sarpanch. Thereafter, along with Jagjit Singh, PW1 went to the police outpost where the aforesaid statement of Gurdeep Singh (PW1) was recorded by ASI Manjit Singh (PW8). Thereafter, PW8 made an endorsement on the said statement and sent the same to the police station at Shimlapuri on the basis of which the formal FIR (Ex.PA/2) was recorded. Thereafter, the dead-body was extricated from the well and the same was photographed. According to the prosecution, inquest was held and the dead-body was sent to the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana for postmortem examination. Post-mortem was performed by one Dr. U.S. Sooch (PW4). Thereafter, according to the prosecution, on 12th June, 2005 one Manoj Kumar (PW2) came to the police station and identified the clothes of the deceased to be those belonging to his brother. Further more, according to the prosecution, on 20th June, 2005, the two accused/Appellants were arrested and on personal search of the accused, Bikram Parshad, a mobile phone was recovered from his pocket which belonged to the deceased. It is also the case of the prosecution that the accused Amrinder Kumar made a disclosure statement on the basis of which a rope was recovered on 23rd June, 2005. On the conclusion of the investigation and after recording the statements of the witnesses and also on receipt of the postmortem report, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The offence being exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, the case was committed to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana for trial. In the trial court, charge under Section 302/34 IPC was framed against the accused/Appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried