Hon'ble RAFIQ, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bharatpur, who has thereby convicted accused-appellant Gyan Singh for offence u/Sec. 302 IPC simplicitor and a fine of Rs.1,000 and in default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months, accused-appellant Shiv Singh was convicted for substantive offence u/Sec. 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of four years with fine of Rs. 1000 and in default whereof six months simple imprisonment. The rest of the accused-appellants i.e. Rajveer, Indal Singh and Prabhu Dayal along with Shiv Singh were convicted for offence u/Sec. 302 with the aid of Section 149 IPC and were awarded same sentence as given to the accused-appellant Gyan Singh. Similarly, all other four accused-appellants namely; Gyan Singh, Rajveer, Indal Singh and Prabhu Dayal, except Shiv Singh were convicted for offence u/Sec. 307 with the aid of Section 149 IPC and were awarded the same sentence as was given to accused Shiv Singh for his conviction for the substantive offence of Section 307 IPC. All the accused-appellants were convicted for offence u/Sec. 459 IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonment of four years and fine of Rs.1000, in default of payment of fine, they were required to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months. Accused-appellant Gyan Singh was additionally convicted for offence u/Sec. 3/25 of Arms act and sentenced to simple imprisonment of one year with fine of Rs. 1000, in default whereof, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months. All the accused-appellants were convicted for offence u/Sec. 460 IPC and sentenced to four years simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default whereof, they have to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and were also convicted for offence u/Sec. 147 IPC, they were sentenced to one year's simple imprisonment and for offence u/Sec. 148 IPC, they were sentenced to one year's simple imprisonment.

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant Vikram Singh S/o Dhujiram lodged a written report Ex.P/14 on 2.5.97 at PS Chiksana alleging therein that in the night of 1.5.97 he was sleeping at a distance of 15-20 yards from his brother Gopal in his house. In the night at around 1.00 a.m. he got up on hearing the sound of fire shot and saw Prabhu, Indal, Rajveer, Gyan and Shiv Singh armed with weapons standing, near the cot on which his brother-Gopal was shouting that Prabhu has fired on his chest. Then Prabhu told Shiv Singh to kill his bhabhi Smt. Devi and thereupon Shiv Singh opened fire and injured her. It is alleged that Prabhu, Rajveer, Indal and Shiv Singh were having kattas in their hands and Gyan was armed with farsa. When they were going outside, 4-5 persons were also seen standing outside but he could not identify them because of the darkness. Prabhu was shouting that today they have killed him and now they will see who dared come to oppose them. Informant raised hues and cries thereafter, Surjan, Ramesh, Subhash, Pappu and other neighbours reached over there.

3. The police on the basis of the aforesaid written report registered a regular first information report for offence u/S. 147, 148, 149, 452 and 307 IPC. During the course of investigation, however, the injured Gopal died, therefore offence u/Sec. 302 IPC was added. Eventually on completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against as many as ten accused for offence u/Sec. 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 459, 460, 120-B, 118, 176 IPC and 3/25 of Arms Act. Charge against the accused-appellant Gyan Singh was framed for substantive offence of Section 302 IPC and Shiv Singh for substantive offence of Section 307 IPC, but they along with other accused were alternatively charged for aforesaid offences with he aid of Section 149. Additionally, all the accused were charged under Section 147, 148, 459 and 460 IPC. Accused-appellants denied the charges and claimed to b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document