The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellants shared a common intention to commit murder, as evidenced by their conduct during the attack, and were therefore guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 Ranbir Penal Code.

Station House Officer, Police Station, Pir Mitha, Jammu on 23.03.2002, presented a charge-sheet against the appellants before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, alleging therein that appellants on 04.02.2002, at 6.45 P.M. came to the grocery shop of one Shakti Kumar Gupta son of Janak Raj Gupta at Bawe Wali Gali, Jammu, demanded money from him and on his refusal, appellant Simon alias Sonu stabbed Shakti Kumar Gupta, while two other appellants, namely, Darshan Gill and Suram Chand alias Surma caught hold of his arms and that the victim of the murderous assault breathed his last on way to a local hospital.

2. The case being one exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, committed the case to Sessions Court, Jammu on 23.03.2002. Appellants were on 27.05.2012 formally charged of the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 Ranbir Penal Code (hereinafter for short, RPC) and 4/25 Arms Act. They denied the charge and asked for regular trial. The prosecution, therefore, was left with no option but to examine the witnesses listed in the charge sheet to substantiate the charges against each of them.

3. The prosecution of the 18 witnesses, listed in the charge-sheet, examined as many as 12 witnesses. The witnesses appearing in the witness box to substantiate the prosecution case, were PWs-Janak Raj Gupta father of victim, who reported the occurrence to the Police Station, Pir Mitha, Parvesh Gupta widow of deceased, Suraj Parkash, his brother in law, PW-Chuni Lal, a local shopkeeper all witnesses to the occurrence and Constable- Mohd. Aslam, HC-Daljit Singh, Manohar Singh-Naib Tehsildar, Baldev Raj-Patwari, were associated with the investigation, Dr. Manju Tickoo, Medical Officer who conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body and Dr. K. K. Raina, and Dr. S. C. Bhagat, Scientific Officers, FSL-who gave their expert opinion touching some aspects of the investigation. PW-Munir Bhat, Investigating Officer, was also examined by the prosecution to substantiate its case. The prosecution witnesses who for one or other reason stayed away from the witness box were Gandharb Singh, ASI, Rajesh Kumar, SPO, Gopal Krishan, Kamal Kishore, Kuldeep Kumar, and Pushpa Devi.

4. The incriminatory material come across in the prosecution evidence, was put to each of the appellants on 03.01.2011. Appellants denied veracity of the prosecution evidence and insisted that they were not falsely implicated and that testimony rendered by the prosecution witnesses was false and fabricated. The appellants, however, did not examine any witness in their defence.

5. Trial Court, on going through the charge-sheet, evidence and record, stand taken by the appellants in their statements recorded under Section 342 Cr.PC and upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, held the prosecution to have proved its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Appellants, were held guilty of offences punishable under Sections 302/34 RPC. The trial Court found that the appellants with criminal attention came to the shop of deceased at Bawe Wali Gali on 04.02.2002 at 6.45 P.M to extort money from deceased and on his refusal to pay, they dragged the deceased from the shop and made a murderous assault on him with intention to commit his murder. The appellants, were, accordingly, convicted of offences punishable under Sections 302/34 RPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they are to further suffer imprisonment of six months.

6. Trial Court judgment dated 30.01.2012 whereby appellants have been convicted of offences punishable under Sections 302/34 RPC and order dated 31.01.2012 imposing sentence, are questioned in the criminal appeal on hand on the grounds set out in the memo of appeal.

7. Learned trial judge in compliance of mandate of Section 374 Cr.P.C has also submitted the record for confirmation of sentence. It is registered as Confirmation