LAWS(P&H)-2013-8-346

BRAHAM SINGH @ NEETU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On August 01, 2013
Braham Singh @ Neetu Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of aforesaid two appeals i.e. CRA No. 711 -DB of 2009 and CRA No. 756 -DB of 2009 preferred by Braham Singh @ Neetu and Ravinder respectively against the judgment of conviction dated 08.06.2009 and order of sentence dated 10.06.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby the appellants were convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ - each. The appellants were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - each. The prosecution case was set in motion on the basis of statement of Inder Singh, father of the deceased -Dharmender made to SI Ranjit Singh at about 1.00 AM on 02.11.2007. In his statement (Ex. PK), Inder Singh stated that he has two sons and daughter. His elder son Dharmender, aged about 26 years, was plying jeep on hire and yesterday i.e. 01.11.2007 after taking meals, he went to sleep on the upper floor of the house, whereas he, his wife Indrawati and his younger son Anil were sleeping in the ground floor. At about 11.00 PM, one boy called his son Dharmender from the street that Ravinder is calling you. On hearing this, his son Dharmender came down. He also woke up. As soon as Dharmender opened the main gate, two boys standing in the street started firing from their pistols. Many bullets hit the head and ear pit of Dharmender as a result of which he fell down on the spot. Both the assailants ran towards Shahid Wali Gali. He further stated that he had seen them while running and out of them one was wearing black coloured pant, however, he could not identify them due to darkness. His son Dharmender died on the spot on account of gun shot injuries. He further stated that about one year ago his son Dharmender had a quarrel with Jony son of Hawa Singh, Jat, resident of Murthal. In that quarrel, Dharmender had sustained injuries. Later on, Dharmender caused fracture on the foot of said Jony, but Jony did not report the matter to the police and asserted to his son that he will take revenge for the same. About one week ago, his son Dharmender had a dispute with one Bobby son of Baljit, Jat, resident of Murthal. He expressed suspicion that his son Dharmender has been murdered by said Bobby and Jony by gun shots. He further stated that at about 8.00/8.30 PM, Bobby and one Devi son of Sultan while roaming in front of his house on a motor -cycle and were seen by one Krishan son of Chet Ram, Jat, resident of Murthal.

(2.) ON the basis of such statement, a ruqa was sent to Police Station for registration of a case. On receipt of ruqa, FIR Ex. PN/1 was lodged at about 1.10 AM. The special report was received by the Magistrate at 9.35 AM on the same day.

(3.) IT was on 09.11.2007, accused -Ravinder and Neetu @ Braham Singh were arrested. During interrogation on 10.11.2007, accused Braham Singh disclosed that the pistol from which he shoot Dharmender has been kept concealed in the fields of village Garh Mirakpur and he can get recovered the same. In pursuance of such disclosure statement (Ex. PL), accused Braham Singh got recovered the pistol from the disclosed place, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PL/1. Similarly, during interrogation on 12.11.2007, accused Ravinder suffered a disclosure statement that the pistol from which he shoot Dharmender has been kept concealed in Murthal in the fields at his farm. In pursuance of such disclosure statement (Ex. PM), accused Ravinder got recovered the pistol from the disclosed place, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PM/1.