Devinder Singh Vs. State

.....does not suggest that though the independent witnesses were available, same were not joined nor it is suggested to either pw-20 or pw-22 that scissor ex.p-1 was visible to any passer-by and any body could have put the same. in the cross-examination, pw-20 has stated that the scissor was lying open in the bushes, the scissor may be lying open but that by itself would not suggest that the same was visible to all and that anybody could have put the same in the manner in which the same was found lying in the bushes. looking to the fact that from scissor ex.p-1 human blood of o group, which tallies with the blood group of deceased govind singh was found and also the absence of evidence suggesting that independent witnesses, though available, were not joined by the investigating agency for the purpose of disclosure statement ex. pw-20/b and the consequent recovery vide memo ex. pw-20/c and for want of evidence that the scissor ex.p-1 lying open in the bushes were visible to any passer-by and that any body could have put the same in the manner in which it was found lying at the time of recovery, the object of sub-section (4) of section 100 of the code cannot be said to have been in any manner violated or offended. ; penal code, 1860 - section 302 & 304 pt. i--homicide not amounting to murder--the incident resulting from sudden fight without any premeditated intention to murder--conviction altered to section 304 pt. i.section 304 pt. i--sentence--homicide not amounting to murder--the convict already undergone period of seven years imprisonment--the incident resulting from sudden fight without any premeditated intention to murder--sentence reduced to the period already undergone. - .....ravening controlling authority and citation was also ordered to be issued in the daily 'the statesman' and 'punjab kesri'. the necessary citation has been placed on the record and the same form part of the present proceedings. the report of the chief revenging controlling authority has been received. no objection for grant of letters of administration in favor of the petitioner has been filed. (4) during the pendency of the present petition, petitioner, shri devinder singh, died. an application under order 22 rule 3 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure was filed for imploding/substituting mr.surender hora, son of late shri devinder singh, petitioner herein, was filed. the deceased petitioner left behind the legal heirs as mentioned in this application (ia 5579/1997). legal heirs of deceased petitioner made statement on 19th august, 1997 that they have no objection if mr.surender hora is brought on record as legal representative of deceased petitioner. in view of the statement of legal heirs of deceased petitioner, application was allowed and mr.surender hora, son of the deceased petitioner, was brought on record as his legal representative vide order dated 19.8.1997. even no objection for grant of letters of administration in favor of son of deceased petitioner has been filed. (5) in view of the above, mr.surender hora, son of the petitioner, reiterated that he is entitled to the letters of administration. (6) the present petition is, accordingly, allowed. letters of administration are granted in favor of mr.surender hora being the legal representative of deceased petitioner in respect of estate as per schedule 'a' to this petition left behind by late mr.inder singh. petition stands disposed of.