BIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the conviction of the appellants in case FIR No. 544 dated 28.12.1999, registered under Sections 302, 307, 325, 323, 34 IPC at Police Station Sector 7, Faridabad, vide judgment dated 11.12.2003, passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Faridabad and against the sentence awarded by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) vide order dated 12.12.2003 whereby the appellants have been awarded the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each for offence under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and in default of payment of fine, shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellants have further been awarded the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each for offence under Section 325 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and in default of payment of fine, shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellants have further been awarded the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) On 28.11.1999 at about 7:00 PM, the complainant Budho informed the Police that her husband had been murdered. As per the complainant, appellant No. 3's husband-Amar Singh was her brother-in-law. Amar Singh and her husband owned adjoining shops and they had a dispute regarding the discharge of waste water. On the fateful date, at about 5:30 PM, the three appellants i.e. the wife of Amar Singh and her two sons tried to forcefully install the pipes by breaking shutter of the shop of complainant's husband. On hearing the noise, the complainant alongwith her husband and son reached the spot, and tried to stop the appellants from damaging their premises but the appellants turned upon them and gave injuries. The appellant No. 2-Kamal Singh hit with Gedala on the head of the deceased and the appellant No. 3-Bega gave blows with iron rod on the head of the deceased. The appellant No. 1 - Bir Singh had given two-three blows with Dao on the head and other parts of the body of the deceased and repeatedly hit him with the sharp edge of the Dao. As regards the son of the complainant, it was alleged that he also received injuries but no doctor had come to prove the same.

(3.) In the course of the trial, as many as 13 prosecution witnesses were examined. The accused-appellants were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in the course of which they took the plea of being falsely implicated in the offence alleged and made a statement that they were innocent. Two defence witnesses were produced. Thereafter, at the conclusion of the trial the learned trial Court, on consideration of the evidence and material on record, passed the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the appellants as mentioned above.