Judgment

TULZAPURKAR, J. :- The three appellants along with one Ram Kishan (since acquitted) were tried for offences u/Ss. 302 and 323 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. as also under Sections 218 and 342 I.P.C. before the learned Sessions Judge, Karnal in Sessions Case No. 3 of 1973 but the learned Sessions Judge on an appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution as well as by the defence acquitted them of all the charges on the ground that the prosecution had failed to prove the offences charged. The State of Haryana preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 501 of 1973 to the High Court challenging the said acquittal and the High Court by its judgment and order dated 22nd November, 1976 allowed the State appeal so far as the three appellants before us are concerned, but confirmed the acquittal of Ram Kishan. The High Court convicted the appellants under Sec. 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and further convicted the first two appellants (Ram Chander and Chand Ram) under Section 218 I. P. C. and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years each; the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. In other words, so far as the three appellants are concerned, their acquittal has been reversed and the question in this appeal is whether the High Court is right in that behalf.

2. The prosecution case against the three appellants and Ram Kishan may breifly be stated as follows. Ram Chander (appellant No. 1) had been posted as a Station House Officer, Police Station, Sadar Panipat a few days before the occurrence, while appellants Nos. 2 and 3 (Chand Ram and Baljeet Singh) and Ram Kishan were working as Assistant Sub Inspector, Head Constable respectively under him at that Police Station. According to the prosecution on the evening of September 6, 1972, appellant No. I summoned some persons suspected of having committed a theft to the Police Station; Banta (P.W. 7) on being summoned through appellant No. 3 had reached the Police Station at about 4/5 p. m. while Vir Singh (P.W. 6) and one Sukha Singh were personally brought by appellant No. 1 to the Police Station at about 7 p.m.; at about 10 p.m. appellants Nos. 2 and 3 and Ram Kishan went to the house of Balwant Singh, the deceased, and proclaimed that Balwant Singh was wanted by the appellant No. 1 at the Police Station whereupon Joginder Singh (PW. 4) his, brother and other members of his family requested that Balwant Singh should not be taken to the police station at that odd hour and that they themselves would produce him before the S.H.O. On the following morning but their request went unheeded and reluctantly Balwant Singh and his servant Harnam Singh (P.W. 5) went with the police party in a tempo driven by Som Nath (P.W. 14) to the police station while Joginder Singh (P.W. 4), Amarjeet Singh (P.W. 12) another brother of Balwant Singh and two others followed the police party on their bicycles; on the way the police party told them (the witnesses) to go back, but Joginder Singh and his companions did not listen and followed the police party right up to the Police Station. Joginder Singh (P.W. 4) approached appellant No. 1 and enquired from him about the matter for which the deceased Balwant Singh had been summoned but appellant No. 1 told him to go back and to make inquiries about the matter on the following morning. According to the prosecution further, within their sight Balwant Singh deceased and Harnam Singh (P.W. 5) were taken in a room of the police station where Moharrir Head Constable (Balwant Singh PW 15) used to sit, and while Joginder Singh (PW 4) and his companions were standing just outside the police station they heard the cries of Balwant Singh deceased who was saying that he was innocent and should not be beaten. In short, according to the prosecution. Balwant Singh was tortured to death by the three appellants and Ram Kishan while he was in police custody on the night between 6