- (1.) This application has been filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. seeking leave to file an appeal against judgment dated 23.3.2011 acquitting respondents No.3 and 4 of the charge framed against them. Enhancement of compensation qua respondent No.2 has also been sought in this application. It is on record that respondents No.2 to 4 were arrayed as accused in FIR No. 51 dated 7.6.2009 for commission of an offence under Sections 302/120 B IPC, Police Station Jaitu. It was an allegation against respondent No.2 that he, in connivance with respondents No.3 and 4, had committed murder of Harpal Singh on 7.6.2009 at 10.00 A.M. as per case of the prosecution.
(2.) The process of law was initiated on a statement made by father of the deceased namely, Jagtar Singh PW-1. Initially FIR was registered under Section 307 and 323 IPC and after death of Harpal Singh, offence under Section 302 IPC was added in the FIR. It was an allegation of the prosecution that to the deceased injuries were caused by respondent No.2 with a kirch. As a motive it was alleged that the murder was committed because the complainant party had taken land on lease from uncle (chacha) of the accused. The Investigating Officer ASI Amarjit Singh PW-10 after getting complaint, went to the place of occurrence, prepared inquest report on the dead body and send it for post-mortem examination which was conducted by Dr. A.S. Thind PW-8. It was found that respondent No.2 had caused 14 injuries on the person of the deceased. The Investigating Officer prepared rough site plan of the place of occurrence with correct marginal notes, took into possession blood stained earth against a recovery memo and recorded statements of the witnesses.
(3.) On completion of investigation final report was put in Court for trial. Copies of the documents were supplied to the accused as per norms and vide order dated 28.8.2009 the case was committed to the competent Court for adjudication. The accused were charge sheeted on 22.1.2010 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced 10 witnesses and also brought on record documentary evidence to prove its case.;