Judgment

Nanavati, J.-These appeals arise out of the judgment and order passed by the Designated Court, Gurdaspur, in Sessions Case No. 100 of 1992 (Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1993). The Designated Court convicted both the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Preven­tion) Act, 1987.

2. What is held by the Designated Court is that on 18.6.90 they along with one Satinder Singh in furtherance of their common intention killed Dharam Singh. At the time of the incident, appellant Daljit Singh was driving a motor cycle and Satinder Singh was the pillion rider. On a signal given by appellant Jaspal Singh, both Daljit Singh and Satinder Singh had gone near the deceased and Satinder Singh had fired two shots from his pistol. The findings regarding involvement of the two appellants were recorded by the Designated Court on the basis of the evidence of two eye-witnesses P.W. 2-Balbir Singh and P.W. 3-Sulakhan Singh, which received some corroboration from the evidence of P.W. 4-Gurdip Singh.

3. What is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the Designated Court has not correctly considered the evidence of t