- (1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the order of Additional Sessions Judge,Ambala, in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2002 decided on 1.4.2005. By the impugned judgment, out of the three accused only two, namely, Balkar Singh and Dinesh Kumar alias Goldy have been held guilty of having committed the murder of Baljinder Singh and have accordingly been convicted under Section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, the accused Balkar Singh has been held guilty of the offence under Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 and has accordingly been convicted for the same. It has however, been concluded that the guilt of the accused Jagtar Singh was not proved from the evidence produced by the prosecution. He was accordingly acquitted of the charges levelled against him. By a separate order passed on 1.4.2005, the accused/appellants Balkar Singh and Dinesh Kumar have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-each under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, they have been ordered to undergo further imprisonment for a period of two months each. Additionally, Balkar Singh has been sentenced rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-under section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. It has also been directed that the sentences awarded to the accused/appellant Balkar Singh would run concurrently.
(2.) As against the conviction of the accused/appellant Dinesh Kumar alias Goldy, he has filed Crl.A.No. 299-DB of 2005. So far as Balkar Singh is concerned, he has contested his conviction through a separate criminal appeal namely, Crl.A.No.347-DB of 2005. The State of Haryana has also preferred an independent appeal so as to contest the determination rendered by the trial Court whereby it has acquitted Jagtar Singh i.e. Crl.A.No.178-DBA of 2006. For the same purpose for which the State of Haryana has preferred an appeal, the complainant Jarnail Singh has preferred Crl.Revision No.466 of 2006 contesting the acquittal of Jagtar Singh. All the aforesaid three appeals and the criminal revision are being disposed of by this common order, as the same have arisen out of one and the same order.
(3.) The prosecution version of the incident is based on the statement of Jarnail Singh PW4 (the brother of the deceased Baljinder Singh) made to ASI Dharam Pal PW12 on 22.11.2001. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, First Information Report Bearing No.128 was registered at Police Station Panjokhra in District Ambala on 22.11.2001 at 11.30 A.M. As per the complaint of Jarnail Singh PW4, he has two other brothers. The name of his elder brother is Gurmail Singh,whereas, the name of his younger brother is Baljinder Singh. Baljinder Singh is stated to have been working as a Driver at Calcutta for the last three years. It is alleged that he was about 25 years of age. Baljinder Singh, the complainant's younger brother, is stated to have come to village Fatehgarh from Calcutta 4/5 days before "Diwali". On the day preceding the date when the complaint was made i.e., on 21.11.2001 the accused/appellant Dinesh Kumar alias Goldy a resident of village Fatehgarh who was employed in the Army had come to the village on leave. Dinesh Kumar came to the house of the complainant Jarnail Singh PW4, to call his brother Baljinder Singh. Dinesh Kumar took Baljinder Singh to the house of Sheo Ram in the same village. From the house of Sheo Ram, the younger son of Sheo Ram i.e. Pilla came to the residence of the complainant Jarnail Singh PW4 and handed over to him a trouser which he had given to a tailor for stitching.;