- (1.) Two (02) accused were convicted by the learned trial Court for a triple murder that took place in the intervening night of 2nd/3rd August, 2002. The deceased were the father, the mother and the brother of accused Harcharan Singh who has since withdrawn his appeal. The present appellant Ramesh Kumar was a tenant in the house belonging to the deceased.
(2.) There is no eye-witness to the crime. The prosecution sought to bring home the guilt of the accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence which have been set out by the High court in the impugned order in seriatim which is extracted below: "1. Appellant Harcharan Singh had been disinherited by his parents vide public notice Ex.-P26. Mrs. Surinder Kaur had also sworn an affidavit (Ex.P-25) to that effect. 2. Appellant had been proceeded against in the security proceedings at the instance of his mother and, vide order dated 10.04.1986 (Ex.P-24), he had been bound down for breach of peace. 3. Appellant Harcharan Singh had no understandable reason to visit his parents after 8/9 years, particularly when he was the lone visitor and he had stayed over a fortnight. 4. He is proved to have been wearing a white Kurta and Pajama when he was last seen on the preceding night by Kamaljit Kaur PW-2. However, he was only in an underwear when he went over to the adjacent house of Kamaljit Kaur PW-2 at 1.30 AM to intimate that some unknown person had attacked their parents. The blood stained clothes aforementioned were, later on, got recovered by appellant, Harcharan Singh, in pursuance of a disclosure statement. 5. Appellant Ramesh Kumar got the recovery of the weapon of offence effected from the house of an aunt of his. Except him, none else could possibly have any inkling about that place of concealment. This circumstances connects appellant Ramesh Kumar with the crime for which he stands convicted. 6. The fact that two co-accused are absconding and did not face the trial is evident from the record. 7. The allegation of motive against Kamaljit Kaur PW-2, her sister and the husband of the latter is too fragile to be accepted. They had to, in any case, get the property of Shamsher Singh on account of the disinheritance of Harcharan Singh appellant by his parents. As a real sister, Kamaljit Kaur would be least interested in losing her only living brother after the murder of her parents and the other brother. Having separated from her husband, she is already distraught woman."
(3.) Except for the recovery of a dagger at the instance of the present accused appellant Ramesh Kumar there is no other incriminating material. The motive attributed for the crime is only qua the accused Harcharan Singh. All other circumstances are relatable to the said accused Harcharan Singh.;