Judgment

FAZL ALI, J.:- Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 1974 by special leave has been preferred by the appellant Ram Narain Singh who was tried by the Sessions Judge, Bhatinda who convicted the appellant under .S. 302 I.P.C, and sentenced him to death and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- or in default further rigorous imprisonment for two years. Ram Narain Singh was also convicted under.S. 307/34 and sentenced to three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/-, under S. 449 I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R. I, and a fine of Rs. 300/-. There was a further conviction in so far as Ram Narain Singh is concerned under S. 324/34 I.P.C. under which he was sentenced to one year s rigorous imprisonment and under Section 323/34 I.P.C. to six months R. I. All the sentences to run concurrently. The other appellants Jaggar Singh, Hakam Singh and Mal Singh in Criminal Appeal No. 259 of 1974 were convicted under S. 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each or in default one year s R.I.each Jaggar Singh was also convicted under section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 300/-, under Section 449, 1. P. C, to three years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 300, and under Section 324/34 I. P. C. to one year s R. I. Hakam Singh and Mal Singh were also convicted under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R. I. and a fine of Rupees 300/- each. Hakam Singh was also convicted under S. 324/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to one year s R. I, and under Section 323 I.P.C, and sentenced to six months R.I., while Mal Singh was convicted under S.324 I.P.C. and sentenced to one year s R. I. and under S. 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to six months R. I. All the sentences to run concurrently. The learned Sessions Judge has also made a reference to the High Court of Punjab & Haryana for confirmation of the death sentence passed on Ram Narain Singh. All the appellants had filed separate appeals before the High Court which were amalgamated and were heard and decided by one judgment. The High Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the convictions and sentences passed by the Sessions Judge and on its refusal to grant leave to appeal to the SC the appellants came up for special leave to this Court which granted special leave. Jaggar Singh, Hakam Singh and Mal Singh have filed a separate appeal to this Court, in which case also special leave was granted by this court, and as both the appeals arise out of a common judgment, we propose to deal with them by one judgment.

2. Put briefly the prosecution case is that the appellant Ram Narain Shah was the Sar-Panch of the Gram Panchayat of village Hassanpur and is alleged to have forcibly taken possession of 10 kilas of land belonging to the Panchayat. Despite several attempts by the Panchayat to dislodge the appellant Ram Narain,Singh from this land nothing of consequence happened as a result of which the members of the Panchayat filed a complaint against Ram Narain Singh before the Deputy Commissioner seeking ejectment of Ram Narain Singh from the land. The deceased Teja Singh and his brother Surjit Singh being members of the said Panchayat took an active part in the campaign for ousting Ram Narain Singh from the Panchayat land which he had forcibly taken possession of. According to the prosecution, the appellant Ram Narain Singh nursed s serious grouse against the deceased and Surjit Singh for their action. It is also alleged that the deceased had threatened Ram Narain Singh some time before the occurrence that if Ram Narain Singh did not surrender the possession voluntarily he will get him dispossessed. The story of the prosecution further discloses that on the date of occurrence i.e. October 2, 1972 the deceased along with his brothers Surjit Singh and Joginder Singh had gone to attend a fair at village Phaphre Bhaike and after spending a day there they were returning to their own village near about the sun-set, when somewhere on the way Teja Singh stayed behind to answer th