MATHUR, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.10.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Hanumangarh, convicting and sentencing accused appellant Bhola Singh as under:- u/S.302 IPC ­ Life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' simple imprisonment. u/S.447 IPC ­ Three months' rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) SUCCINCTLY , the facts of the case are that on 24.6.2008 Shri Lal Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station Tibbi, reduced in writing a statement made by Gurjant Singh son of Baldev Singh, aged 23 years, at Government Hospital, Hanumangarh Town. As per the statements reduced in writing, Gurjant Singh alongwith his brother Sevak Singh went to their agriculture field at about 11:00 AM. At the agriculture field they found Bhola Singh son of Thana Singh and Neetu Singh son of Bhola Singh sowing the rice on three canals of land. On asking, they stated that they sown the rice being daring enough. When Sevak Singh and Gurjant Singh tried to enter into the filed, Bhola Singh and Neetu Singh gave them kassi blows. The first kassi blow was given by Bhola Singh on the right side of the head of Sevak Singh, consequently he fell down. Both the accused persons then further gave kassi blows to Sevak Singh. A Telephonic information of this incident was given to Gurjit Singh son of Meethu Singh, thus, he and Hamir Singh came to the spot by a jeep. Looking to them, Bhola Singh and Neetu Singh fled from the spot and Sevak Singh and Gurjant Singh were then taken to the hospital, where during the course of treatment Sevak Singh died. On basis of the statement aforesaid, a case was registered, necessary investigation was made and a police report was filed before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Tibbi. Being a case session triable, the same was committed to the court of Sessions. The Sessions court after hearing counsel for the accused persons framed charges for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 447, 302 or 302/34, 307/34 and 323/34 Indian Penal Code. On denial of the same, trial commenced as desired.
(3.) THE prosecution supported its case by adducing ocular evidence through PW-1 to PW-25 and getting several documents exhibited. While explaining the adverse circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence both the accused persons termed the same as false and concocted. Definite explanation was given by them that they were having agricultural work contract for the land where they sow the rice. On the fateful day, Gurjant Singh and Sevak Singh forcibly entered into the land to dispossess them and also with an intention to kill them. Certain assaults were made by Sevak Singh and Gurjant Singh, consequent thereof certain injuries were received.;