BIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is instituted against the judgment and order dtd. 4/6/2018, rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Pathankot, in Sessions Case No. 04 dtd. 12/8/2016, by appellant Bir Singh @ Beera. He was charged with and tried for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 IPC. He was convicted and sentenced under Sec. 302 IPC to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 5/4/2016, the police party was present at CIA Chowk, Pathankot, in connection with patrolling, where it received information regarding murder in Mohalla Bajri Company Pathankot. Inspector/SHO Bharat Bhushan along with other police officials reached the spot. Suresh Kumar son of Om Parkash got recorded his statement. According to him, he was having two sons. Elder son Vineet Kumar was aged about 29 years. Younger son Varun Kumar was about 28 years of age. At about 2.30 P.M., his son Vaneet Kumar told him that he has some altercation with appellant Bir Singh alias Beera. President Vijay Passi had invited him for a compromise with the appellant. He received information after some time that some dispute has arisen. He went to the house of the appellant. At about 6.15 P.M., when Suresh Kumar complainant entered into the house of appellant Bir Singh, he saw that Bir Singh armed with knife attacking his son Vaneet Kumar in a very brutal way. The clothes of President Vijay Passi were also smeared with blood. After giving injuries with knife, accused Bir Singh along with the handle of knife escaped from the spot. Due to the grievous injuries, Vaneet died on the spot. The dead-body was sent for post-mortem examination. Investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of the case. The statement of the accused was also recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. He cited one witness in his defence. He was convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, the present appeal.