S.S.Dewan, J. - (1.) CHANAN Ram appellant was brought to trial for the murder of his son Gurmel Singh. He was found guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that Gurmel Singh (now deceased) separated from his father Chanan Ram about 10 years ago. They two lived in separate houses opposite to each other. When they were living jointly, a water pump had been installed in front of their house. About two months prior to the present occurrence, the accused objected to the drawing of water by the deceased from that water pump. The accused used to abuse the deceased and his family members while in a drunken brawl. The prosecution story goes that on the fateful night, i.e. on 9th June, 1974 at about 11 P.M. the deceased returned to his house after jagrata. His wife Amro served meals to him and his daughter Joginder Kaur. The accused, who was then present in his house, started abusing the deceased. The deceased objected but the accused did not desist from abusing him. The deceased went up to the accused and requested him with folded hands to desist from abusing. The accused plunged his dagger in the chest of the deceased, on receipt of which the latter slumped on the ground. Smt. Amro and her daughter Joginder Kaur immediately rushed to the spot and removed the deceased to their house. On hearing the alarm of the witnesses, Nandu, Prem Nath and Sohan Lal were attracted to the spot to whom they narrated the whole incident and in the meanwhile the accused made good his escape with the dagger. Gurmel Singh expired while being removed from the house of the accused. Joginder Kaur was left to guard the dead body, while Smt. Amro accompanied by Nandu, Prem Nath and Sohan Lal went to Police Station, Phagwara and lodged the First Information Report, Exhibit PA, with Sub Inspector Bal Mukand (P.W. 6). Sub Inspector Bal Mukand went to the house of the deceased and held inquest, Exhibit PL. Thereafter he lifted blood stained earth from outside the house of the accused and prepared the visual plan, Exhibit PG/1. The accused was not found in his house. On the following day of the occurrence, the accused went to Naranjan Singh Sarpanch (P.W.3) and made a confession of having murdered his son by giving him a dagger blow. At about 3.00 P.M. Naranjan Singh Sarpanch produced the accused before the Sub Inspector who formally arrested him. On interrogation the accused made a disclosure statement leading to the recovery of blood -stained dagger, Exhibit P. 3, from the specified place of concealment. Blood stained Chaddar, Ex. P. 2 and shirt, Ex. P1 worn by the accused, were also taken into possession vide Memo Exhibit PF/1. Vide reports, Exhibits PN and PN/1 of the Chemical Examined and the Serologist respectively, earth etc. and Banyan were found stained with human blood. Dr. Indra Khosla (P.W. 5) who conducted autopsy on the dead body of Gurmel Singh on 10th June, 1974 at 11.00 A.M. found the following injury: - - 1. Incised wound of about 1 1/4" x " x 3" deep in left 5th intercostal space parallel to the ribs. It was about 3" lateral to the mid -line and just below and middle to the left nipple. According to the doctor, all the other organs were healthy, except heart, Heart was injured under the injury near its apex. Stomach contained about 3 ounces of semi -digested food. The doctor opined that death occurred as a result of shock and haemorrhage, resulting from the injury which caused extensive damage to the heart. The said injury being ante -mortem, in the opinion of the doctor, was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The death was opined to be instantaneous, and the time that elapsed, according to her, between death and post mortem was about 12 hours. After necessary investigation, the accused was challaned and committed. At the trial, Smt. Amro (P.W. 1) and Joginder Kaur (P.W. 2) gave the eye -witness account of the occurrence. Naranjan Singh Sarpanch (P.W. 3) besides deposing to his having produced the appellant before the Sub Inspector, also deposed to the confessional statement made by the appellant before him. Sub Inspector Bal Mukand (P.W. 6) deposed to the investigation part of the prosecution case. The rest of the evidence is not very material.
(3.) THE appellant when examined under section 313 Criminal Procedure Code, denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded his false complicity, due to amenity with the deceased. He however, led no evidence in defence.;