Judgment

S.NATARAJAN, J.

(1) THE appellant Surinder Singh who has preferred this appeal by special leave has been convicted under S. 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000.00 and to undergo three years RI in default of payment of fine. He has also been convicted under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo Rl for 6 months on each count, the sentences to run concurrently with the sentence of imprison- ment for life.

(2) THE appellant has been awarded conviction for the offences mentioned above in the following circumstances. At about 9 or 10 p.m. on 8/05/1975 the appellant and deceased Manjit Singh, who were both aged about 18 years had a quarrel while taking curd and while in a drunken mood near the shop of one Mohinder Pal in Kharasanwali Gali, Amritsar. Public Witness 2 Ramesh Chand and PW 3 Subhash Chander intervened and pacified them and sent them away. While the appellant went away to his house Manjit Singh went to the new market and lay down on a bench. Some hours later i.e. at about 3 or 4 a.m. on 9/05/1975 Public Witness 2 was awakended by the appellant and enquired as to where Manjit Singh was. Public Witness 2 took the appellant to the new market which was only about 9 or 10 yards from where Public Witness 2 was sleeping and pointed out Manjit Singh sleeping on the bench. At once the appellant caught hold of the hair of Manjit Singh and pulled him down to the ground and thereafter beat him on his head 3 or 4 times with an iron rod brought by him. Not stopping with that, the appellant took out a knife brought by him and inflicted two or three stabs on the chest of Manjit Singh. Manjit Singh died almost instantaneously on receipt of the injuries inflicted on him by the appellant. The appellant warned Public Witness 2 that if he told anyone of what he had seen he would also be dealt with in the same manner and then left the place.

(3) PUBLIC Witness 2 went back to his house and dozed off for some time and thereafter went and informed Public Witness 3 at his house as to what had happened. PW 3 went to the New Market along with Public Witness 2 and saw the dead body of Manjit Singh lying there. He advised Public Witness 2 to inform the matter to one Jagan Nath and on Public Witness 2 informing Jagan Nath he was asked by the latter to inform one Kartar Chand, Municipal Commissioner about the occurrence and accordingly Public Witness 2 went and informed Kartar Chand. Thereafter it is said that Kartar Chand took Public Witness 2 to the police station and Public Witness 2 lodged the first information report.

(4) ON the basis of Public Witness 2S report a case was registered against the appellant and was duly investigated. The appellant was not immediately traceable but later in the day he was apprehended near the bus stand and on being questioned he gave a statement leading to the recovery of a blood-tained knife from a place of concealment in his house.

(5) MANJIT SinghS dead body was sent for autopsy and Public Witness 1 Dr. Gurdip Kumar Uppal, who conducted the autopsy found two incised injuries on the chest, another incised injury on the upper part of the leftear pinna and three contused injuries on the forehead and both sides of the head. Besides there were also abrasions. The stab injuries on the chest and the injuries on the head which had caused fracture of the left parietal bone were certified by Public Witness 1 to be injuries sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

(6) THE appellant was duly charged and tried for the offence of murder. The appellant denied his complicity in the offence and stated that Public Witness -3 and the Municipal Commissioner Kartar Chand were engaged in doing satta gambling and deceased Manjit Singh was their henchman and because he (appellant) and some others had raised objection to the satta gambling activities they have all joined together and falsely imp