- (1.) As identical questions of law & facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide both the above indicated appeal and revision petition, arising out of the same impugned judgment, in order to avoid the repetition.
(2.) The matrix of the facts & material, unfolded during the course of trial, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the instant appeal & revision petition and emanating from the record, is that, in the wake of complaint of complainant Sucha Singh (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against appellants Uttam Singh s/o Waryam Singh and Gurbikram Singh s/o Diwan Singh, vide FIR No. 63 dated 21.6.1999, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 & 323 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act by the police of Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur.
(3.) Having completed all the codal formalities and taking into consideration the evidence on record, the trial Court convicted and sentenced appellant Uttam Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, to pay a fine of Rs 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for a period of one year, for the commission of an offence punishable under section 304-I of IPC. Likewise, to undergo RI for a period of three years, to pay a fine of Rs 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for a period of three months under section 27 of the Arms Act, by way of impugned judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 11.1.2002. However, 2nd accused Gurbikram Singh was acquitted by the trial Court.;