(1.) This appeal under Section 2 of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970 is directed against an order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 31st July, 1972 by which the appellants Piara Singh and Gian Singh had been convicted under Sec. 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and Kashmir Singh and Joginder Singh were convicted under Sections 302/34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The appellants were tried under the aforesaid sections by the Sessions Judge, Amritsar who however acquitted them of the charges framed against them. On appeal to the High Court by the State of Punjab the High Court was of the view that the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge was absolutely wrong and the High Court reversed the judgment of the Sessions Judge and convicted the appellants as indicated above.
(2.) Both the Courts below have given a complete and exhaustive narration of the details of the prosecution case and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all over again. The present occurrence has resulted in the death of Surjit Singh a collateral of the accused and appears to be a result of a long standing enmity between the parties. Suffice it to say that on 14th November, 1967 at about 4.00 p.m. the deceased Surjit Singh had arrived at his house with a cartload of maize cobs from the side of his field. At that time Harbhajan Singh, a cousin of the deceased and his mother Kesar Kaur and two other relations, namely, Chanan Kaur and Mango were sitting inside the courtyard of their house 7 yards from the door of his house. The four appellants entered the house of Piara Singh variously armed and pounced upon the deceased and assaulted him with Kirpan, Gandasi and Barchhi and also with a bullet from the rifle. According to the prosecution, Piara Singh was armed with a rifle, fired a rifle shot at the deceased on his groins as a result of which he fell down and died soon after. On hearing the alarm Kundan Singh, Gurbux Singh and Surat Singh then arrived at the spot who were apprised of the occurrence by Harbhajan Singh and other members of the family also narrated the entire incident to them. The complainant Harbhajan Singh rushed to the Police Station, Valtoha situated at about 4 miles from the place of the occurrence and lodged the F.I.R. at 4.30 p.m. giving the necessary details of the incident. The dead body of the deceased was taken to the hospital which was lying near the Manawan Canal when the Sub-Inspector came and sent the same to the mortuary for post-mortem examination. After the usual investigation a charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants as a result of which they were committed to the Court of Session, tried and finally acquitted by the learned trial Judge. We have heard counsel for the parties at great length and have also gone through the evidence and the judgments of the two courts. The High Court has discussed the evidence in great detail and it has also indicated clearly the important circumstances relied upon by the learned Sessions Judge in acquitting the appellants and has sought to displace them by giving, in our opinion, cogent reasons. We are clearly of the opinion that the High Court was right in reversing the order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge who had made a wrong approach to the whole case. This was not a case in which two views were reasonably possible. The judgment of the Sessions Judge is legally erroneous and is also against the weight of the evidence on the record.
(3.) As the High Court has given detailed reasons for setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge, it is not necessary for us to discuss the matter in great detail.