Present : Mr. Vinod Ghai Senior Advocate Vs. the State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1158041
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-07-2014
AppellantPresent : Mr. Vinod Ghai Senior Advocate
RespondentThe State of Punjab
Excerpt:
cra no.689-db of 2001 -1- in the high court of punjab and haryana, at chandigarh --- cra no.689-db of 2001 date of decision: 07.07.2014 kewal singh and others ..appellants versus the state of punjab ..respondent coram : hon’ble mr.justice satish kumar mittal hon'ble mr.justice mahavir s. chauhan present : mr.vinod ghai, senior advocate, with mr.joban preet singh, advocate, for the appellants. mr.manoj bajaj, additional advocate general, punjab for the respondent-state . --- 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. yes/no 2. to be referred to the reporter or not?. yes/no 3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. yes/no mahavir s. chauhan, j. this appeal is directed against judgment of conviction dated 01.12.2001 and order of sentence dated 03.12.2001, whereby the learned additional sessions judge, sangrur (here-in-after referred as 'the trial court').has convicted and sentenced the appellants, for committing murder of mewa singh, gurdev singh, raj singh and chamkaur singh alias bhor, as follows:- 1. kewal s.148, ipc. rigorous imprisonment for 3 singh years.s.302, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of mewa of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -2- s. 302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of raj singh of rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of chamkaur of rs.5000/- and in default of singh alias bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of gurdev of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 2. bhola s.148, ipc rigorous imprisonment for 3 singh years.s.302/149 ipc for life imprisonment and to pay fine committing murder of rs.5000/- and in default of of mewa singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for to undergo life imprisonment and murder of raj singh to pay fine of rs.5000/-, in default of fine to undergo r.i.for 1 year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of chamkaur of rs.5000/- and in default of singh alias bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of gurdev of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 3. dayal s.148 ipc rigorous imprisonment for 3 singh years.s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of mewa of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of raj singh of rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of chamkaur of rs.5000/- and in default of singh alias bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of gurdev of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -3- 4. dhian u/s.148, ipc rigorous imprisonment for 3 singh years.s.302, ipc, for the life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of mewa of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of chamkaur of rs.5000/- and in default of singh alias bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of raj singh of rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of gurdev of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 5. darshan s.148 ipc rigorous imprisonment for 3 singh s/o years.hardev s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine singh murder of mewa of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.s.302, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of raj singh of rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.s.302, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of chamkaur of rs.5000/- and in default of singh alias bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. s.302/149, ipc, for life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of gurdev of rs.5000/- and in default of singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year. it is pointed out by the learned senior counsel for the appellants that during the pendency of appeal, appellant-dayal singh has died on 19.06.2008. he has placed on record copy of the death certificate. factum of death of appellant dayal singh is not disputed by the learned state counsel. consequently, appeal qua appellant dayal singh is ordered to abate. prosecution case, put precisely, is that bhola singh and chamkaur virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -4- singh, sons, mewa singh, gurdev singh and nachhatar singh, brothers of complainant-surjit kaur (since deceased) were booked for committing the murder of mohinder singh and gurdial singh about six-seven months before the occurrence. chamkaur singh, mewa singh, and gurdev singh were released on bail in that case. on 07.10.1989, at or around 05.30 p.m., complainant-surjit kaur, mewa singh (deceased).chamkaur singh (deceased).gurmail singh (pw2) and gurdev singh(deceased) were present at the under-construction house of the complainant and her son raj singh had gone to graze the buffaloes. darshan singh, whose niece was married to appellant-kewal singh gamdoor singh (proclaimed offender).kewal singh and dhian singh armed with guns, bhola singh, dayal singh, kulwant singh @ jaswant singh (brother of darshan singh) armed with 'gandasis' descended the scene. darshan singh raised a 'lalkara' saying that they would avenge murder of mohinder singh and gurdial singh. thereupon, all the accused entered complainant's house. darshan singh fired a gun shot targeting chamkaur singh, gamdoor singh fired a gun shot at gurdev singh and kewal singh fired a gun shot at mewa singh. after killing mewa singh, gurdev singh and chamkaur singh, the accused boarded the tractor, which was parked outside and went in search of raj singh saying that they would not spare him also. complainant hiding herself proceeded towards police post while pw2- gurmail singh accompanied by jagraj singh and shingara singh followed the accused and saw that accused darshan singh and kewal singh fired one shot each at raj singh which proved fatal. when they raised an alarm, accused also fired upon them. complainant came across the police party headed by asi jaswant virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -5- singh (pw23) and suffered statement (exhibit pdd) narrating the entire sequence of events, based whereupon, a firs.information report fir, for short).exhibit pdd/2 was recorded. asi jaswant singh (pw23) reached the village and so did si rajinder singh (since deceased).si rajinder singh prepared inquest reports, exhibits pl, pi, pf, and pc, in respect of the dead bodies of the deceased mewa singh, gurdev singh, chamkaur singh, and raj singh, respectively, prepared site-plans, exhibits pee and pll of the places of occurrence, recovered three empties of .315 bore from near the dead body of mewa singh vide memoranda, exhibits pff and pgg, one empty of .315 bore from near the door vide memorandum, exhibit phh, and one empty of .315 bore from in front of the door and another from near the window outside the room and one empty of .12 bore from outside the window vide memorandum, exhibit pii, and one empty of .315 bore from near the dead body of deceased raj singh, lifted blood stained earth from the two spots, recorded statements of witnesses, got the dead bodies of the deceased subjected to post mortem and arrested the accused. during interrogation, appellant kewal singh suffered a disclosure statement, exhibit poo, and pursuant thereto got recovered a .12 bore single barrel gun while arms dealer jeet singh (pw11) produced a licenced .315 bore rifle belonging to accused dhian singh, having its barrel cleansed. empty of . 12 bore recovered from the spot was sent for forensic examination and vide report, exhibit pss, it was reported that the empty was fired from the .12 bore single barrel gun. however, empties of .315 bore rifle could not be matched as its barrel had been cleansed. virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -6- on completion of investigation, accused were challened. learned trial court, having found a prima facie case framed charge against the accused under sections 148, 302, and 302 read with section 149 of the indian penal code, 1860 (for short, 'ipc') and section 27 of the indian arms act, 1959 (arms act, for short).on a plea of not guilty and a claim to be tried having been put up by the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses including gurmail singh (pw2).to give an ocular account of the occurrence, dr. suresh kumar (pw1) who has proved on record the post mortem reports, exhibit pa, relating to raj singh; exhibit pd, pertaining to chamkaur singh; exhibit pg, pertaining to gurdev singh and exhibit pj.pertaining to mewa singh and his opinion that cause of death of the deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary cours.of nature; and asi jaswant singh (pw23) who had enumerated various steps taken for progress of the investigation. complainant surjit kaur, however, died before she could be examined as a witness. when examined under section 313 of the criminal procedure code, 1973 (for short, 'cr.p.c.').the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of the prosecution. they, however, admitted that about six-seven months before the occurrence, mewa singh, gurdev singh and nachhatar singh etc.had killed mohinder singh and gurdial singh. bhola singh and nachhatar singh were in custody while others had been allowed bail. fir in respect of that occurrence was recorded on 10.03.1989. accused kewal singh also came out with the plea that he had virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -7- appeared as an eye-witness against complainant's brothers nachhatar singh etc.the deceased in the instant case according to him were murdered by gamdoor singh, an 'a-class' terrorist and other terrorists. dhian singh put-forth a plea that he surrendered before the additional chief judicial magistrate, sangrur, and claimed test identification parade which was conducted in the presence of a naib tehsildar/executive magistrate and the complainant and pw2-gurmail singh could not identify him in the test identification parade so held. his licensed rifle was lying deposited with arms dealer jit singh at bathinda. in their defence, accused examined mohinder singh as dw1. on hearing the prosecutor and the defence and on appraisal of the record, learned trial court found the prosecution to have proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and, accordingly, convicted and sentenced them as herein-above stated. we have heard learned senior counsel for the appellants and learned additional advocate general, punjab, for the respondent-state and have also perused the record. learned senior counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment/order by submitting that the deceased, in fact, were killed by gamdoor singh, an 'a-class' terrorist and his accomplices and the appellants have been falsely named on account of the on-going hostility between the two sides. it is pointed out that as per case of the prosecution itself the appellants had appeared as witnesses in a case involving murder of mohinder singh and gurdial singh at the hands of the deceased and others.to substantiate his submission, the learned senior counsel has pointed out that initially in her statement (exhibit pdd) complainant had named darshan singh virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -8- son of dalip singh of beero ke kalan as an accused but having come to know that on the day of occurrence he was lodged in jail, darshan singh son of hardev singh, resident of boha, has been brought in as an accused and this, in itself, should suffice to conclude that case of the prosecution is based on falsehood. it has also been pointed out by the learned senior counsel that appellant dhian singh surrendered before the court and made an application for holding a test identification parade so as to ascertain if the so called eye witnesses of the occurrence were able to identify him. surprisingly, the complainant and gurmail singh (pw2) could not identify him as one of the assailants. to support this contention the learned senior counsel has referred to cross-examination of pw2 gurmail singh and has pointed out that while admitting that he was not able to identify appellant dhian singh in the test identification parade, the witness has tried to wriggle out of effect of his failure to identify him by stating that the persons with muffled faces were produced in the identification parade and for that reason he was unable to identify the said appellant and had sent telegram to the concerned authorities in this respect. according to the learned counsel, orders passed by the court do not support this assertion and the telegrams stated to have been sent by him have not been proved on record. further, according to learned senior counsel for the appellants, only .12 sbbl gun and empty of the same bore stated to have been recovered from the spot were sent for forensic examination and that too after a long delay and without converting the gun into a sealed parcel. thus, possibility of a bullet having been fired from the said gun before sending it to forensic science virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -9- laboratory to create evidence in support of case of the prosecution cannot be ruled out. it has also been submitted that .315 bore gun and cartridges of that bore stated to have been recovered from the spot were not sent for forensic examination and, as such, this part of the recovery cannot be used against the appellants. on the contrary, on behalf of the respondent-state the impugned judgment and order have been defended and it has been argued that evidence available on record establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants killed the deceased on account of on-going animosity and the counter story set up by the defence that the deceased were killed by gamdoor singh and his accomplices has remained unproved. the learned state counsel has also pointed out that .315 bore gun had been cleansed before its recovery and that being so, sending the same for forensic examination would have been an exercise in futility while no material has been brought on record to substantiate the plea that the shot from .12 bore gun was fired before sending it for forensic examination. as regards darshan singh, it is submitted by the learned state counsel that name of darshan singh son of dalip singh of beero ke kalan was mentioned in exhibit pdd but it was clarified by the complainant in her supplementary statement that real culprit was darshan singh son of hardev singh, resident of boha. no other or further point has been urged on either side. as aforesaid law was set in motion by surjit kaur by making statement (exhibit pdd) before the investigating officer. in that statement she had vividly described the occurrence as stated herein before. she unfortunately virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -10- died before she could appear as a witness in support of the case of the prosecution. however, her son pw2 gurmail singh, who was also present on the spot of occurrence at the relevant time has brought on record ocular account of the occurrence and has stood the test of cross-examination successfully. effort of learned senior counsel for the appellants to discredit evidence of this witness on the plea that he was not able to identify appellant dhian singh in the test identification parade is found to be without force. no doubt he has admitted in his cross-examination that he could not identify appellant dhian singh in the test identification parade but has explained that it was because the persons who were made to participate in the test identification parade had their faces muffled. this explanation is also disputed by the learned senior counsel saying that it is not so recorded in the order passed by the learned magistrate. be that as it may, the defence after questioning the witness in respect of the test identification parade and his failure to identify appellant dhian singh, stopped short of confronting the witness with a plea that he could not identify dhian singh appellant because dhian singh was not involved in the occurrence. that being so, the defence cannot be heard to say that only because pw2 gurmail singh was unable to identify appellant dhian singh, the entire prosecution story is liable to be rejected. rather, on the contrary, it is quite surprising that an accused after having participated in an occurrence which claimed four precious lives ran away from the spot and then surrendered before the court and pleaded for holding a test identification parade in spite of the fact that he had been specifically named in the fir and there was no doubt about his identity. in our view this was a ploy of the defence to identify the witness/witnesses of the prosecution, who could identify virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -11- the said appellant in the test identification parade and thereby carry forward the on-going saga of rivalry. another attempt of learned senior counsel of the appellants to discredit pw gurmail singh (pw2) on the ground of his close relationship with the deceased, is also found to be unacceptable because no material has been brought on record by the defence, either in the cross examination of the witnesses of the prosecution or by leading evidence in defence, to show that the witness, by conviction and incarceration of the appellants, has derived any monetary or other benefit for himself or for any one else, he may be interested in. as regards the fact that some of the appellants were witnesses against the complainant party in a case involving murder charges against the complainant side, it only needs to be stated that the two sides have a long history of hostilities against each other, which, in our view, provided a good motive to the appellants to accomplish the hoary act of killing four persons on the complainant side and it cannot be accepted that the witness has named the appellants only because some of them had appeared as witnesses against the complainant side. another circumstance that surfaces from the evidence available on record is that the long drawn hostilities between the two sides was result of a dispute concerning a piece of land measuring eighteen killas left behind by prem singh, maternal uncle of pw gurmail singh, who, before he died issueless, had suffered a decree in favour of nachhatar singh qua that land. that land, in fact, was under the occupation of gurdial singh, kakkar singh and dial singh. nachhatar singh, with the help of deceased gurdev singh and mewa singh and others.attempted to take forcible possession of it. for that virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -12- reason the aforesaid persons were booked under sections 447 and 427, ipc. deceased mewa singh, gurdev singh and raj singh, along with nachhatar singh, bhola singh (brother of pw gurmail singh) and darshan singh (uncle of gurdev singh) were also arraigned as accused under section 326, ipc, on the allegation of causing injuries to mohinder singh, gurdial singh, dial singh and appellant kewal singh. the two cases, however, resulted into acquittal of the accused therein. gurdial singh even challenged the consent decree passed in favour of nachhatar singh, though without success. according to asi jaswant singh (pw23).empties of .315 bore and an empty .12 bore cartridge were recovered from the spot of occurrence. appellant kewal singh, on being interrogated, while in police custody, suffered a disclosure statement, exhibit poo and pursuant thereto got recovered a .12 bore single barrel gun vide memorandum, exhibit poo/1. forensic science laboratory, vide report, exhibit pss, has reported that the .12 cartridge recovered from the spot of occurrence was fired from the aforesaid . 12 bore single barrel gun. the cartridge was recovered on 18.10.1989 and the gun, exhibit p56, was taken in possession on 25.10.1989. though the gun and the cartridge were sent to forensic science laboratory on 17.11.1989 and 01.12.1989, respectively, but it has been categorically stated by asi jaswant singh (pw23) that the gun, exhibit p56, was made into a parcel which was sealed immediately on its recovery. while asi jaswant singh (pw23) is not shown to have been confronted with a suggestion that the gun was not sealed into a parcel or a shot was fired from it before sending it to the forensic science laboratory, report of forensic science laboratory, exhibit pss, has virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -13- confirmed that the cartridge and the gun were received in that laboratory in sealed parcels and the seals were intact and tallied with the specimen seal. as regards the submission that the .315 bore rifle was not subjected to forensic examination it only needs to be pointed out that said rifle was not subjected to forensic examination because its barrel was found to be cleansed before it could be subjected to forensic examination. even otherwise, result of forensic or ballistic examination of the guns/rifles could only be used to corroborate the ocular account of version which, in our view, has been established beyond reasonable doubt from the deposition of pw2 gurmail singh and has been sufficiently corroborated by other evidence, including medical evidence brought on record in the testimony of dr. suresh kumar goyal (pw1) he has stated that he subjected dead bodies of the deceased to autopsy on 18.10.1989 at 12.00 noon onwards and found four injuries on the dead body of raj singh, six injuries on that of chamkaur singh, twelve on that of gurdev singh, and four on that of mewa singh. he has also proved on record the post mortem reports, exhibit pa, relating to raj singh, exhibit pd, pertaining to chamkaur singh, exhibit pg, pertaining to gurdev singh and exhibit pj.pertaining to mewa singh and his opinion that the cause of death of the deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary cours.of nature. in the evidence as discussed above, the occurrence and involvement of all the appellants, except darshan singh, are proved beyond any manner of doubt. however, there is lot of suspicion as regards complicity virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -14- of appellant darshan singh. in exhibit pdd, statement of the complainant on the basis of which fir was recorded, darshan singh of beero ke kalan is mentioned as one of the perpetrators of the crime. though, parentage of darshan singh is not mentioned but it has been clarified that maternal niece of said darshan singh is married to appellant kewal singh. incidentally, the complainant could not examine as a witness in support of case of the prosecution because of her death but her son gurmail singh appeared as pw2 and while reiterating that darshan singh raised a lalkara and fired upon chamkaur singh, clarified in his cross examination that he and his mother surjit kaur knew darshan singh of beero ke kalan. presumably on being reminded of the fact that in her supplementary statement surjit kaur had named darshan singh son of hardev singh of village boha as an accused in stead of darshan singh son of dalip singh of beero ke kalan. he turned around and stated that though, he knows darshan singh of beero ke kalan but he is not aware if the complainant also knew him. he, however, clarified that niece of accused balwant singh is married to accused kewal singh. balwant singh is none else but brother of darshan singh son of dalip singh of beero ke kalan. he was a witness in a case pertaining to murders of mohinder singh and gurdial singh at the hands of the deceased and it seems that for that reason he was named as an accused by the complainant in the instant case. it may be relevant to point out here that darshan singh son of dalip singh was lodged in central jail, hisar, on 07.10.1989, as stated by pw1 mohinder singh, clerk, central jail, hisar. this witness has also proved entry no.2859 dated 07.10.1989 vide which darshan virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -15- singh son of dalip singh of beero ke kalan was lodged in central jail, hisar, on 07.10.1989 in fir no.273 dated 05.09.1989 under punjab excise act. he has also revealed that the aforesaid darshan singh was released from jail on 07.10.1989. supplementary statement of surjit kaur complainant has not been proved and that being so it is not possible to see how she had resolved the confusion regarding identity of darshan singh. pw2 gurmail singh, the only witness of the occurrence examined on behalf of the prosecution has chosen not to clarify the situation as regards the identity of darshan singh. incidently, no motive has been attributed to darshan singh son of hardev singh of village boha for killing the deceased. in view of the foregoing discussion, it comes out that prosecution has not been able to fix identity of appellant darshan singh beyond reasonable doubt. finding of conviction recorded against him, therefore, deserves to be reversed. in the consequence, appeal qua appellant dayal singh is abated, and qua appellant darshan singh it is accepted and his conviction and sentence are set aside while acquitting of the offences of which he was charged and convicted. amount of fine, if already deposited by appellant darshan singh be refunded to him as per procedure known to law. however, appeal of appellants kewal singh, bhola singh and dhian singh is dismissed and impugned judgment/order qua them are affirmed. their bail bonds are cancelled. these appellants shall forthwith surrender before learned chief judicial magistrate, sangrur failing which the learned chief judicial magistrate shall cause them to virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cra no.689-db of 2001 -16- be re-arrested and committed to custody so as to serve the remainder of the sentences awarded to them by the learned trial court and affirmed by this court. [satish kumar mittal].[mahavir s. chauhan].judge judge july 07, 2014 adhikari virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh
Judgment:

CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, AT CHANDIGARH --- CRA No.689-DB of 2001 Date of Decision: 07.07.2014 Kewal Singh and others ..Appellants Versus The State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE MAHAVIR S.

CHAUHAN Present : Mr.Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Joban Preet Singh, Advocate, for the appellants.

Mr.Manoj Bajaj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State .

--- 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

Yes/No 2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not?.

Yes/No 3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

Yes/No MAHAVIR S.

CHAUHAN, J.

This appeal is directed against judgment of conviction dated 01.12.2001 and order of sentence dated 03.12.2001, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur (here-in-after referred as 'the trial court').has convicted and sentenced the appellants, for committing murder of Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh, Raj Singh and Chamkaur Singh alias Bhor, as follows:- 1.

Kewal S.148, IPC.

Rigorous imprisonment for 3 Singh years.S.302, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Mewa of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -2- S.

302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Raj Singh of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Chamkaur of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh alias Bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Gurdev of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2.

Bhola S.148, IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 3 Singh yeaRs.S.302/149 IPC for Life imprisonment and to pay fine committing murder of Rs.5000/- and in default of of Mewa Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for To undergo life imprisonment and murder of Raj Singh to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of fine to undergo R.I.for 1 year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Chamkaur of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh alias Bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Gurdev of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

3.

Dayal S.148 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 3 Singh yeaRs.S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Mewa of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Raj Singh of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Chamkaur of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh alias Bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Gurdev of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -3- 4.

Dhian U/s.148, IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 3 Singh yeaRs.S.302, IPC, for the Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Mewa of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Chamkaur of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh alias Bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Raj Singh of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Gurdev of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

5.

Darshan S.148 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 3 Singh s/o yeaRs.Hardev S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine Singh murder of Mewa of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.S.302, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Raj Singh of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.S.302, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Chamkaur of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh alias Bhor payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

S.302/149, IPC, for Life imprisonment and to pay fine murder of Gurdev of Rs.5000/- and in default of Singh payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

It is pointed out by the learned senior counsel for the appellants that during the pendency of appeal, appellant-Dayal Singh has died on 19.06.2008.

He has placed on record copy of the death certificate.

Factum of death of appellant Dayal Singh is not disputed by the learned State counsel.

Consequently, appeal qua appellant Dayal Singh is ordered to abate.

Prosecution case, put precisely, is that Bhola Singh and Chamkaur Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -4- Singh, sons, Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh and Nachhatar Singh, brothers of Complainant-Surjit Kaur (since deceased) were booked for committing the murder of Mohinder Singh and Gurdial Singh about six-seven months before the occurrence.

Chamkaur Singh, Mewa Singh, and Gurdev Singh were released on bail in that case.

On 07.10.1989, at or around 05.30 p.m., Complainant-Surjit Kaur, Mewa Singh (deceased).Chamkaur Singh (deceased).Gurmail Singh (PW2) and Gurdev Singh(deceased) were present at the under-construction house of the complainant and her son Raj Singh had gone to graze the buffaloes.

Darshan Singh, whose niece was married to appellant-Kewal Singh Gamdoor Singh (Proclaimed Offender).Kewal Singh and Dhian Singh armed with guns, Bhola Singh, Dayal Singh, Kulwant Singh @ Jaswant Singh (brother of Darshan Singh) armed with 'Gandasis' descended the scene.

Darshan Singh raised a 'Lalkara' saying that they would avenge murder of Mohinder Singh and Gurdial Singh.

Thereupon, all the accused entered complainant's house.

Darshan Singh fired a gun shot targeting Chamkaur Singh, Gamdoor Singh fired a gun shot at Gurdev Singh and Kewal Singh fired a gun shot at Mewa Singh.

After killing Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh and Chamkaur Singh, the accused boarded the tractor, which was parked outside and went in search of Raj Singh saying that they would not spare him also.

Complainant hiding herself proceeded towards police post while PW2- Gurmail Singh accompanied by Jagraj Singh and Shingara Singh followed the accused and saw that accused Darshan Singh and Kewal Singh fired one shot each at Raj Singh which proved fatal.

When they raised an alarm, accused also fired upon them.

Complainant came across the police party headed by ASI Jaswant Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -5- Singh (PW23) and suffered statement (Exhibit PDD) narrating the entire sequence of events, based whereupon, a FiRs.Information Report FIR, for short).Exhibit PDD/2 was recorded.

ASI Jaswant Singh (PW23) reached the village and so did SI Rajinder Singh (since deceased).SI Rajinder Singh prepared inquest reports, Exhibits PL, PI, PF, and PC, in respect of the dead bodies of the deceased Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh, Chamkaur Singh, and Raj Singh, respectively, prepared site-plans, Exhibits PEE and PLL of the places of occurrence, recovered three empties of .315 bore from near the dead body of Mewa Singh vide memoranda, Exhibits PFF and PGG, one empty of .315 bore from near the door vide memorandum, Exhibit PHH, and one empty of .315 bore from in front of the door and another from near the window outside the room and one empty of .12 bore from outside the window vide memorandum, Exhibit PII, and one empty of .315 bore from near the dead body of deceased Raj Singh, lifted blood stained earth from the two spots, recorded statements of witnesses, got the dead bodies of the deceased subjected to post mortem and arrested the accused.

During interrogation, appellant Kewal Singh suffered a disclosure statement, Exhibit POO, and pursuant thereto got recovered a .12 bore single barrel gun while arms dealer Jeet Singh (PW11) produced a licenced .315 bore rifle belonging to accused Dhian Singh, having its barrel cleansed.

Empty of .

12 bore recovered from the spot was sent for forensic examination and vide report, Exhibit PSS, it was reported that the empty was fired from the .12 bore single barrel gun.

However, empties of .315 bore rifle could not be matched as its barrel had been cleansed.

Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -6- On completion of investigation, accused were challened.

Learned trial Court, having found a prima facie case framed charge against the accused under Sections 148, 302, and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 (Arms Act, for short).On a plea of not guilty and a claim to be tried having been put up by the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses including Gurmail Singh (PW2).to give an ocular account of the occurrence, Dr.

Suresh Kumar (PW1) who has proved on record the post mortem reports, Exhibit PA, relating to Raj Singh; Exhibit PD, pertaining to Chamkaur Singh; Exhibit PG, pertaining to Gurdev Singh and Exhibit PJ.pertaining to Mewa Singh and his opinion that cause of death of the deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary couRs.of nature; and ASI Jaswant Singh (PW23) who had enumerated various steps taken for progress of the investigation.

Complainant Surjit Kaur, however, died before she could be examined as a witness.

When examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.').the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of the prosecution.

They, however, admitted that about six-seven months before the occurrence, Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh and Nachhatar Singh etc.had killed Mohinder Singh and Gurdial Singh.

Bhola Singh and Nachhatar Singh were in custody while others had been allowed bail.

FIR in respect of that occurrence was recorded on 10.03.1989.

Accused Kewal Singh also came out with the plea that he had Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -7- appeared as an eye-witness against complainant's brothers Nachhatar Singh etc.The deceased in the instant case according to him were murdered by Gamdoor Singh, an 'A-Class' terrorist and other terrorists.

Dhian Singh put-forth a plea that he surrendered before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur, and claimed test identification parade which was conducted in the presence of a Naib Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate and the complainant and PW2-Gurmail Singh could not identify him in the test identification parade so held.

His licensed rifle was lying deposited with arms dealer Jit Singh at Bathinda.

In their defence, accused examined Mohinder Singh as DW1.

On hearing the prosecutor and the defence and on appraisal of the record, learned trial Court found the prosecution to have proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and, accordingly, convicted and sentenced them as herein-above stated.

We have heard learned Senior counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State and have also perused the record.

Learned Senior counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment/order by submitting that the deceased, in fact, were killed by Gamdoor Singh, an 'A-Class' terrorist and his accomplices and the appellants have been falsely named on account of the on-going hostility between the two sides.

It is pointed out that as per case of the prosecution itself the appellants had appeared as witnesses in a case involving murder of Mohinder Singh and Gurdial Singh at the hands of the deceased and otheRs.To substantiate his submission, the learned senior counsel has pointed out that initially in her statement (Exhibit PDD) complainant had named Darshan Singh Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -8- son of Dalip Singh of Beero Ke Kalan as an accused but having come to know that on the day of occurrence he was lodged in jail, Darshan Singh son of Hardev Singh, resident of Boha, has been brought in as an accused and this, in itself, should suffice to conclude that case of the prosecution is based on falsehood.

It has also been pointed out by the learned senior counsel that appellant Dhian Singh surrendered before the court and made an application for holding a test identification parade so as to ascertain if the so called eye witnesses of the occurrence were able to identify him.

Surprisingly, the complainant and Gurmail Singh (PW2) could not identify him as one of the assailants.

To support this contention the learned senior counsel has referred to cross-examination of PW2 Gurmail Singh and has pointed out that while admitting that he was not able to identify appellant Dhian Singh in the test identification parade, the witness has tried to wriggle out of effect of his failure to identify him by stating that the persons with muffled faces were produced in the identification parade and for that reason he was unable to identify the said appellant and had sent telegram to the concerned authorities in this respect.

According to the learned counsel, orders passed by the court do not support this assertion and the telegrams stated to have been sent by him have not been proved on record.

Further, according to learned senior counsel for the appellants, only .12 SBBL gun and empty of the same bore stated to have been recovered from the spot were sent for forensic examination and that too after a long delay and without converting the gun into a sealed parcel.

Thus, possibility of a bullet having been fired from the said gun before sending it to Forensic Science Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -9- Laboratory to create evidence in support of case of the prosecution cannot be ruled out.

It has also been submitted that .315 bore gun and cartridges of that bore stated to have been recovered from the spot were not sent for forensic examination and, as such, this part of the recovery cannot be used against the appellants.

On the contrary, on behalf of the respondent-State the impugned judgment and order have been defended and it has been argued that evidence available on record establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants killed the deceased on account of on-going animosity and the counter story set up by the defence that the deceased were killed by Gamdoor Singh and his accomplices has remained unproved.

The learned State counsel has also pointed out that .315 bore gun had been cleansed before its recovery and that being so, sending the same for forensic examination would have been an exercise in futility while no material has been brought on record to substantiate the plea that the shot from .12 bore gun was fired before sending it for forensic examination.

As regards Darshan Singh, it is submitted by the learned State counsel that name of Darshan Singh son of Dalip Singh of Beero Ke Kalan was mentioned in Exhibit PDD but it was clarified by the complainant in her supplementary statement that real culprit was Darshan Singh son of Hardev Singh, resident of Boha.

No other or further point has been urged on either side.

As aforesaid law was set in motion by Surjit Kaur by making statement (Exhibit PDD) before the Investigating Officer.

In that statement she had vividly described the occurrence as stated herein before.

She unfortunately Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -10- died before she could appear as a witness in support of the case of the prosecution.

However, her son PW2 Gurmail Singh, who was also present on the spot of occurrence at the relevant time has brought on record ocular account of the occurrence and has stood the test of cross-examination successfully.

Effort of learned Senior counsel for the appellants to discredit evidence of this witness on the plea that he was not able to identify appellant Dhian Singh in the test identification parade is found to be without force.

No doubt he has admitted in his cross-examination that he could not identify appellant Dhian Singh in the test identification parade but has explained that it was because the persons who were made to participate in the test identification parade had their faces muffled.

This explanation is also disputed by the learned Senior counsel saying that it is not so recorded in the order passed by the learned Magistrate.

Be that as it may, the defence after questioning the witness in respect of the test identification parade and his failure to identify appellant Dhian Singh, stopped short of confronting the witness with a plea that he could not identify Dhian Singh appellant because Dhian Singh was not involved in the occurrence.

That being so, the defence cannot be heard to say that only because PW2 Gurmail Singh was unable to identify appellant Dhian Singh, the entire prosecution story is liable to be rejected.

Rather, on the contrary, it is quite surprising that an accused after having participated in an occurrence which claimed four precious lives ran away from the spot and then surrendered before the court and pleaded for holding a test identification parade in spite of the fact that he had been specifically named in the FIR and there was no doubt about his identity.

In our view this was a ploy of the defence to identify the witness/witnesses of the prosecution, who could identify Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -11- the said appellant in the test identification parade and thereby carry forward the on-going saga of rivalry.

Another attempt of learned Senior counsel of the appellants to discredit PW Gurmail Singh (PW2) on the ground of his close relationship with the deceased, is also found to be unacceptable because no material has been brought on record by the defence, either in the cross examination of the witnesses of the prosecution or by leading evidence in defence, to show that the witness, by conviction and incarceration of the appellants, has derived any monetary or other benefit for himself or for any one else, he may be interested in.

As regards the fact that some of the appellants were witnesses against the complainant party in a case involving murder charges against the complainant side, it only needs to be stated that the two sides have a long history of hostilities against each other, which, in our view, provided a good motive to the appellants to accomplish the hoary act of killing four persons on the complainant side and it cannot be accepted that the witness has named the appellants only because some of them had appeared as witnesses against the complainant side.

Another circumstance that surfaces from the evidence available on record is that the long drawn hostilities between the two sides was result of a dispute concerning a piece of land measuring eighteen killas left behind by Prem Singh, maternal uncle of PW Gurmail Singh, who, before he died issueless, had suffered a decree in favour of Nachhatar Singh qua that land.

That land, in fact, was under the occupation of Gurdial Singh, Kakkar Singh and Dial Singh.

Nachhatar Singh, with the help of deceased Gurdev Singh and Mewa Singh and otheRs.attempted to take forcible possession of it.

For that Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -12- reason the aforesaid persons were booked under Sections 447 and 427, IPC.

Deceased Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh and Raj Singh, along with Nachhatar Singh, Bhola Singh (brother of PW Gurmail Singh) and Darshan Singh (Uncle of Gurdev Singh) were also arraigned as accused under Section 326, IPC, on the allegation of causing injuries to Mohinder Singh, Gurdial Singh, Dial Singh and appellant Kewal Singh.

The two cases, however, resulted into acquittal of the accused therein.

Gurdial Singh even challenged the consent decree passed in favour of Nachhatar Singh, though without success.

According to ASI Jaswant Singh (PW23).empties of .315 bore and an empty .12 bore cartridge were recovered from the spot of occurrence.

Appellant Kewal Singh, on being interrogated, while in police custody, suffered a disclosure statement, Exhibit POO and pursuant thereto got recovered a .12 bore single barrel gun vide memorandum, Exhibit POO/1.

Forensic Science Laboratory, vide report, Exhibit PSS, has reported that the .12 cartridge recovered from the spot of occurrence was fired from the aforesaid .

12 bore single barrel gun.

The cartridge was recovered on 18.10.1989 and the gun, Exhibit P56, was taken in possession on 25.10.1989.

Though the gun and the cartridge were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory on 17.11.1989 and 01.12.1989, respectively, but it has been categorically stated by ASI Jaswant Singh (PW23) that the gun, Exhibit P56, was made into a parcel which was sealed immediately on its recovery.

While ASI Jaswant Singh (PW23) is not shown to have been confronted with a suggestion that the gun was not sealed into a parcel or a shot was fired from it before sending it to the Forensic Science Laboratory, report of Forensic Science Laboratory, Exhibit PSS, has Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -13- confirmed that the cartridge and the gun were received in that laboratory in sealed parcels and the seals were intact and tallied with the specimen seal.

As regards the submission that the .315 bore rifle was not subjected to forensic examination it only needs to be pointed out that said rifle was not subjected to forensic examination because its barrel was found to be cleansed before it could be subjected to forensic examination.

Even otherwise, result of forensic or ballistic examination of the guns/rifles could only be used to corroborate the ocular account of version which, in our view, has been established beyond reasonable doubt from the deposition of PW2 Gurmail Singh and has been sufficiently corroborated by other evidence, including medical evidence brought on record in the testimony of Dr.

Suresh Kumar Goyal (PW1) He has stated that he subjected dead bodies of the deceased to autopsy on 18.10.1989 at 12.00 Noon onwards and found four injuries on the dead body of Raj Singh, six injuries on that of Chamkaur Singh, twelve on that of Gurdev Singh, and four on that of Mewa Singh.

He has also proved on record the post mortem reports, Exhibit PA, relating to Raj Singh, Exhibit PD, pertaining to Chamkaur Singh, Exhibit PG, pertaining to Gurdev Singh and Exhibit PJ.pertaining to Mewa Singh and his opinion that the cause of death of the deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary couRs.of nature.

In the evidence as discussed above, the occurrence and involvement of all the appellants, except Darshan Singh, are proved beyond any manner of doubt.

However, there is lot of suspicion as regards complicity Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -14- of appellant Darshan Singh.

In Exhibit PDD, statement of the complainant on the basis of which FIR was recorded, Darshan Singh of Beero Ke Kalan is mentioned as one of the perpetrators of the crime.

Though, parentage of Darshan Singh is not mentioned but it has been clarified that maternal niece of said Darshan Singh is married to appellant Kewal Singh.

Incidentally, the complainant could not examine as a witness in support of case of the prosecution because of her death but her son Gurmail Singh appeared as PW2 and while reiterating that Darshan Singh raised a lalkara and fired upon Chamkaur Singh, clarified in his cross examination that he and his mother Surjit Kaur knew Darshan Singh of Beero Ke Kalan.

Presumably on being reminded of the fact that in her supplementary statement Surjit Kaur had named Darshan Singh son of Hardev Singh of village Boha as an accused in stead of Darshan Singh son of Dalip Singh of Beero Ke Kalan.

He turned around and stated that though, he knows Darshan Singh of Beero Ke Kalan but he is not aware if the complainant also knew him.

He, however, clarified that niece of accused Balwant Singh is married to accused Kewal Singh.

Balwant Singh is none else but brother of Darshan Singh son of Dalip Singh of Beero Ke Kalan.

He was a witness in a case pertaining to murders of Mohinder Singh and Gurdial Singh at the hands of the deceased and it seems that for that reason he was named as an accused by the complainant in the instant case.

It may be relevant to point out here that Darshan Singh son of Dalip Singh was lodged in Central Jail, Hisar, on 07.10.1989, as stated by PW1 Mohinder Singh, Clerk, Central Jail, Hisar.

This witness has also proved Entry No.2859 dated 07.10.1989 vide which Darshan Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -15- Singh son of Dalip Singh of Beero Ke Kalan was lodged in Central Jail, Hisar, on 07.10.1989 in FIR No.273 dated 05.09.1989 under Punjab Excise Act.

He has also revealed that the aforesaid Darshan Singh was released from jail on 07.10.1989.

Supplementary statement of Surjit Kaur complainant has not been proved and that being so it is not possible to see how she had resolved the confusion regarding identity of Darshan Singh.

PW2 Gurmail Singh, the only witness of the occurrence examined on behalf of the prosecution has chosen not to clarify the situation as regards the identity of Darshan Singh.

Incidently, no motive has been attributed to Darshan Singh son of Hardev Singh of village Boha for killing the deceased.

In view of the foregoing discussion, it comes out that prosecution has not been able to fix identity of appellant Darshan Singh beyond reasonable doubt.

Finding of conviction recorded against him, therefore, deserves to be reversed.

In the consequence, appeal qua appellant Dayal Singh is abated, and qua appellant Darshan Singh it is accepted and his conviction and sentence are set aside while acquitting of the offences of which he was charged and convicted.

Amount of fine, if already deposited by appellant Darshan Singh be refunded to him as per procedure known to law.

However, appeal of appellants Kewal Singh, Bhola Singh and Dhian Singh is dismissed and impugned judgment/order qua them are affirmed.

Their bail bonds are cancelled.

These appellants shall forthwith surrender before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur failing which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall cause them to Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.689-DB of 2001 -16- be re-arrested and committed to custody so as to serve the remainder of the sentences awarded to them by the learned trial court and affirmed by this court.

[Satish Kumar Mittal].[Mahavir S.

Chauhan].Judge Judge July 07, 2014 adhikari Virendra singh adhikari 2014.07.26 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh