- (1.) SITA Ram, a young man of 25 years who was going to be married on 8th May, 1984, was murdered on the intervening night of 6th/7th May, 1984 in his shop regarding which FIR No. 123 of 1984 was lodged in Police Station Akhnoor on 7th May, 1984 at about 10 a. m. The place of occurrence is about 37 Kms away from the police station.
(2.) AFTER investigation of the case the prosecution arrested Padam Singh and Sangram Singh for the commission of offences punishable under section 302/34 RFC. The accused persons were committed to the court of sessions for standing their trial by Chief Jud. Magistrate, vide his order 7 -7 -1984. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the preliminary arguments and perusing the record submitted under section 173 Cr. P. C. discharged accused Sangram Singh vide his order dated 29th Oct. 1984, now impugned in this revision petition.
(3.) ACCORDING to the prosecution Sita Ram deceased a young man of 25 years of age had developed illicit relations with Bimle Devi, the wife of accused Padam Singh. It is also alleged that Sangram Singh accused had illicit relations with the sister of Padam Singh. Padam Singh accused was annoyed on account of the alleged illicit relations of his wife with the deceased. He contacted the relations of the deceased in order to persuade him to abandon those illicit relations but all invain. Thereafter he alongwith Sangram Singh murdered -the deceased with the "Tabbar" - Both the accused persons were seen going towards the village of Sita Ram and also corning out of the shop of the deceased on the day of occurrence with a Tabbar in the hands of Padam Singh. Padam Singh is also alleged to have made an extra -judicial concession admitting therein that he alongwith Sangram Singh had murdered the deceased on account of deceasedâ„¢s persistence to have illicit relations with his wife, Bimla Devi. Both the accused were alleged to have committed the offence of murder of Sita Ram and the prosecution had prayed that they be charged under section -02/34 RPC. The learned Sessions Judge relying upon a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1979 SC 366, discharged Sangram Singh accused by holding that there was no evidence against the said accused. The learned Sessions Judge further held that he had come to the conclusion of not proceeding against Sangram Singh after sifting the weighing the evidence placed on record in the form of statements recorded under section 161 Cr. P. C. and other documents u/s 173 Cr. P. C. The learned Sessions Judge held that section 34 RFC which embodies the principle of joint liability was not attracted so for accused Sangram Singh is concerned.;