LAWS(P&H)-1952-2-11

BAKHSHISH SINGH Vs. THE STATE

Decided On February 15, 1952
BAKHSHISH SINGH Appellant
V/S
THE STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition directed against the order of the Sessions Judge, whereby the petitioner's appeal from an order of Magistrate convicting him under section 307, I.P.C. and sentencing him to 31/2 years' rigorous imprisonment and also requiring him.

(2.) THE facts of the case he within a narrow compass. The prosecution alleged that on 19 -6 -48 P/W Gurdev Singh and a number of other persons were proceeding from Malerkotla to their village Kothala. On the way, they were accosted by the appellant and four other persons. The petitioner asked one of Gurdev Singh's companions to get aside because he had to settle his account with Gurdev Singh, Teja Singh and Sadhu Singh. Gurdev Singh and his friends tried to save themselves by taking shelter under bushes but, as they were doing so, Bakhshish and his companions started firing upon them. Gurdev Singh who was also carrying a gun fired back upon his opponents. The exchange of shots went on for sometime but no one was injured and since the noise attracted the attention of the village that was situated nearby the petitioner and his companions made good their escape. The report to the Police Station was made on the following day.

(3.) BAKHSHISH Singh denied his guilt and stated that he never went to the place where Gurdev Singh and others were fired at. Some of the witnesses who were produced by him in defence stated that the persons who exchanged fire with Gurdev Singh and his companions were strangers and Bakhshish Singh was not one of them. Both the trial court and the learned Sessions Judge rejected the petitioner's plea and after taking into consideration the entire evidence produced by the prosecution came to the conclusion that the version given by the prosecution was fully established and there could be no doubt of the petitioner's guilt. After hearing the petitioner's counsel I do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent finding of the Courts below.