1. These appeals arise from the judgment and order dated 05.10.2009 and 22.10.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jammu, in FIR No. 70/2001 registered at Police Station Bahu Fort under S.302, S.307, S.326, S.109, and 34 RPC. By the impugned judgment, the appellants Balwan Singh and Dev Raj, along with co - accused Gandharb Singh, were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under S.302 RPC and to five years' rigorous imprisonment for the offences under S.307 and S.326 RPC, besides a fine of Rs.50,000 each. The trial court also referred for confirmation of the sentence.

2. During the pendency of the appeals, co - accused Gandharb Singh passed away, resulting in abatement of the appeal insofar as he is concerned. The present appeals, therefore, survive only with respect to Dev Raj and Balwan Singh.

3. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that appellant Balwan Singh had a dispute with one Ashok Kumar regarding a booking counter at the Jammu Bus Stand. Ashok Kumar had authorised Pardeep Kumar alias Deepa (deceased) through a Power of Attorney to represent him in the matter. On 24.04.2001, Pardeep Kumar, along with his friend Kamal Raj alias Pappu (also deceased) and PW Sanjeev Kumar, had gone to the JDA office at Panama Chowk, Jammu, to attend proceedings related to the dispute, pursuant to directions from a civil court to approach the JDA authorities for resolution.

4. On 24.04.2001, deceased Pardeep Kumar (alias Deepa) and Kamal Raj (alias Pappu), along with PW Sanjeev Kumar (the complainant), were present at the first floor of the JDA office complex at Panama Chowk, Jammu. While they were conversing, appellants Balwan Singh and Gandharb Singh arrived at the spot, accompanied by Gandharb Singh's Personal Security Officer, i.e. Appellant Dev Raj, who was armed with an AK - 56 rifle. The appellants began abusing Pardeep Kumar. When he objected, Balwan Singh allegedly exhorted Gandharb Singh and Dev Raj to fire at the trio. Acting on this, Dev Raj opened fire, killing Pardeep Kumar and Kamal Raj on the spot, while Sanjeev Kumar was assaulted with the butt of a 12 - bore gun, which Balwan Singh had snatched from Gandharb Singh. Thereafter, the appellants threw Sanjeev Kumar out of the window. The injured witness managed to crawl to safety and was taken to the hospital. On this basis, FIR No. 70/2001 under S.302, S.307, S.326, S.109, and 34 ,RPC was registered at Police Station Bahu Fort. After completion of the investigation, the challan was presented before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, and subsequently committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Judge, Jammu, after examining 40 witnesses out of 53 cited by the prosecution and considering the defence evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellants as earlier noted.

5. In appeals, the appellants challenged the conviction primarily because:
*· PW Sanjeev Kumar, the purported eyewitness, gave contradictory statements and lacked credibility due to his antecedents.
*· PW Onkar Singh, another alleged eyewitness, was a planted witness with a criminal background, and his delayed disclosure of the incident (on 06.05.2001) rendered his testimony unreliable.
*· No test identification parade was conducted to identify appellant Dev Raj, who was allegedly unknown to the witnesses.
*· The deceased themselves were alleged to be persons of criminal background, and their presence at the JDA complex was suspicious.
*· The police reached the scene only after 5 PM, indicating suppression of the true genesis of the incident and fabrication of the prosecution's story.

6. The Counsel appearing for appellant Dev Raj (in CRA No. 57/2009) contended that the Investigating Officer, Abdul Rouf Lone, in his deposition, admitted that Dev Raj had acted in exercise of his right of private defence to protect his protectees, co - accused Gandharb Singh, from the complainant party. It was argued that the firing was not intentional or premeditated but a defensive act, which at best constitute