JUDGMENT

M.K. Mukherjee, J. - In this appeal preferred under Section 14 of the Terrorist Affected A1:eas (Special Courts) Act, 1984 the six appellants challenge the order of conviction and sentence recorded against them under Sections 148/ 307/ 307/ 149/ 324/324/149/323/323/149 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana.

2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that on April 13, 1984 at or about 8 p.m. when Bhajan Singh and his son Chain Singh were sitting on the onirni in front of their house in village Mangli Tanda, the six appellants came there shouting that Bhajan Singh should not be spared. Of the appellants, Amar Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Chand Singh were armed with lathis, Kabul Singh with a double barrelled gun and Roshan Singh with a takua. Immediately after reaching there Kabul Singh fired a shot from his gun aiming at and causing injuries to Chain Singh. When Bhajan Singh stepped forward he met with the same fate at the hands of Kabul Singh. On being so hit both of them raised alarms and hearing the same Mela Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sucha Singh, Smt. Maya and Smt. Chindo reached there. Seeing them the appellants Mukhtiar Singh, Chand Singh and Roshan Singh started assaulting them with their respective weapons. Finding no other alternative, when the victims started hurling brickbats towards them, the appellants fled away. On that very night the injured Bhajan Singh, Chand Singh, Smt. Maya and Chindo went to the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana for their treatment while the other three namely, Jarnail Singh, Mela Singh and Sucha Singh got themselves examined at the local Primary Health Centre as their injuries were minor.

3. On the following morning, ASI Mulkh Raj of Police Our Post Kalan went to Civil Hospital, Ludhiana on receipt of a wireless message from Sahnewal Police Station and recorded the statement of Bhajan Singh (Ext. PCC). He forwarded the statement to the police station for registering a case thereupon and took up investigation. He went to the spot and got a site plan prepared. Besides he seized some blood stained earth and two empty cartridges and in due course sent the same for examination by experts. In course of the investigation he also seized the licensed gun of appellant Kabul Singh and sent it to the Ballistic Expert. After examining the witnesses and completing the formalities of investigation the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet against the appellants.

4. The motive that was ascribed by the prosecution for the murderous assault was that Bhajan Singh had purchased a plot from the Gram Panchayat for a sum of Rs. 3000/- and constructed a house thereon. Since the Panchayat had not issued any receipt for the above sum in spite of repeated demands, Bhajan Singh had earlier on the day in question had gone to the house of appellant Amar Singh, who was a member of the Panchayat, and demanded the receipt or the money back. Over this issue an altercation took place between them.

5. In order to bring home the charges levelled against the six appellants the prosecution examined Bhajan Singh (P.W. 6), Chain Singh (P.W. 7) and Smt. Maya (P.W. 8) as eye witnesses. Besides, it examined five doctors, namely, Dr. Uggar Singh (P.W. l), Dr. Ravinder Kumar (P.W. 2), Dr. Deepak Walia (P.W. 3), Dr. Parminder Singh (P.W. 4), Dr. Suman Gupta (P.W. 5) who examined and treated the injured at one or the other time, ASI Mulkh Raj (P.W. 9) and Nachhattar Singh (P.W. 10), a draftsman who prepared the site plan. The report of the Chemical Examiner indicating that human blood was found on the seized earth and that of the Director of Forensic Science Laboratory in proof of the fact that the seized empty cartridges were fired from the licened gun of Kabul Singh were also exhibited (to PNN arid Ext. POO respectively).

6. In their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. the appellants, except Roshan Singh, took a plea of right of private defense of their persons. Their positive stand was that a