Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. - (1.) THE instant appeal has been preferred by Bhupinder Singh son of Amar Singh, resident of Ajit Nagar, Jalandhar. As per head note on the impugned judgment, at the time of pronouncement of the judgment he was 58 years. He was sought to be prosecuted in case FIR No. 68 dated 7.5.1992 registered at police station, Division No. 4 -Jalandhar. He has been convicted under Section 307 IPC by learned additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar and sentenced to undergo RI for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. In default thereof to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.
(2.) THE FIR in the instant case was registered on the statement of Major Rajinder Sharma who stated therein that he had received an information that Col. Dyal Singh Kang had been stabbed in abdomen near hotel Skylark at about 9.30 p.m. on 6.5.1992 by one Bhupinder Singh. On reaching the spot, he came to know from the CRPF Guard at Circuit House that an altercation had ensued between the accused and the injured, due to colliding of scooters. Lt. Col. Dyal Singh had been taken to the hospital. Before adverting to the factual matrix of the case and analysing the same, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has raised five arguments. Firstly she argued that in this case the prosecution has miserably failed to establish identity of the accused as his name was not known to the injured. Secondly, she has argued that through the place of occurrence was a thoroughfare, being near Skylark hotel and it has also come in the FIR that the CRPF Guard was posted in the Circuit House, it was incumbent upon the investigating/prosecuting agency to join an independent witness but none has been joined. Thirdly, the learned Counsel has argued that the weapon of offence has not been established as the weapon shown to the injured in Court was not the same as used by the accused. The fourth argument raised is that the injured -witness has been duly confronted with his previous statement, wherein he had stated that he had handed over the assailant to a Head Constable of the police. Her last argument is that there is a delay in recording of the FIR as also in delivery of the special report.
(3.) ALTHOUGH the learned Counsel has made the aforesaid submissions with full vehemence in an attempt to persuade this Court. Yet I am not ready to accept any of her contentions for the reasons stated hereinafter.;