Judgment MEHTAB S. GILL, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment/order dated 10.9.1999 of the sessions Judge, Kapurthala whereby he convicted Charanjit Singh alias channa, palwinder Singh alias Pinda, Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi and Sukhjit Singh alias sukha under Sections 302/149 I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to further undergo RI for three months. They were also convicted under Sec.148 i. P. C. and sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi was also convicted under Sec.27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to further undergo RI for one month. 2. Complainant Karam Singh filed a Revision against the sentences. We will be deciding Cr. A. No.462-DB of 1999, Cr. A. No.472-DB of 1999 and Cr. Revision No.411 of 2000, by this common judgment, as they arise out of the same judgment/order dated 10.9.1999 of the Sessions Judge, kapurthala. 3. During the course of trial, Mohinder Singh accused died. Jagjit singh alias Jaggo and Hira Singh did not face trial and were declared proclaimed offenders. Sukhdev Singh, Sukhjinder Singh alias Sukhi, Sukhwinder singh alias sokha and Narinder Singh after having tried by the trial Court, were acquitted of all the charges. No appeal has been filed against their acquittal by the state. 4. The prosecution case is unfolded by the statement Ex. PC of Karam singh, given to SI Som Raj at Banna Mal Chowk on 5.11.1994 at 4.30 p. m. Karam Singh stated that he is an agriculturist by profession and is a resident of village Bhandal Bet. He has three sons namely Swaran Singh, Pargan singh and jaswant Singh. His son Pargan Singh and Puran Singh son of Harbans singh belonging to his village were candidates, in the last Panchayat elections for election of Sarpanch. Puran Singh won the elections by 89 votes. Pargan singh filed a case and got Puran Singh Sarpanch suspended. Puran Singh got a stay order against the suspension. Puran Singh and his family members, had a grudge against Karam Singhs family, especially Pargan Singh for having him suspended. 5. Puran Singh won the elections by 89 votes. Pargan singh filed a case and got Puran Singh Sarpanch suspended. Puran Singh got a stay order against the suspension. Puran Singh and his family members, had a grudge against Karam Singhs family, especially Pargan Singh for having him suspended. 5. On 5.11.1994 at 12.30 p. m. Karam Singh along with his son Pargan Singh, jaswant Singh and Atma Singh son of Mehar Singh, Gurpal Singh son of jeet singh, Kashmir Singh son of Jit Singh, all residents of Village Bhandal Bet were present in his fields for watering the potato crop. Hira Singh armed with a kirpan, sukhdev Singh armed with Kirpan, Gopi armed with.12 bore gun, younger brother of Gopi armed with.12 bore gun, Narinder Singh armed with a.315 bore rifle, Mohinder Singh armed with a Gandasi, Channa armed with.12 bore gun, sukhwinder Singh armed with 3x3 rifle, all sitting on three different tractors came from the side of the tubewell (motor) of Gopi. They stopped their tractors at some distance. They came down from the tractors. Jaggo, Sukhdev Singh, narinder singh, Mohinder Singh, Sukhjinder Singh and Sukhi raised a lalkara that they will teach Pargan Singh a lesson for getting Puran Singh Sarpanch suspended. Pargan singh ran towards the fields of one Jiwan Singh. Hira Singh armed with.12 bore gun, Gopi armed with.12 bore gun, Gopis younger brother armed with.12 bore gun, Channa armed with.12 bore gun and Palwinder Singh armed with.12 bore gun, encircled Pargan Singh. They started firing at him with their weapons. Pargan Singh fell down on receiving the gun shot injuries. Karam Singh and others raised a hue and cry and not to kill Pargan Singh. After firing at pargan singh, all the assailants ran away from the spot, with their respective weapons and their tractors. Karam Singh went near Pargan Singh and found that he was dead. 6. Pargan Singh had received fire shot injuries on his stomach, right shoulder, left wrist, neck and other parts of the body. On the basis of this statement, f. I. R. Ex. PC/1 was recorded on 5.11.1994 at 5.15 p. m. at Police Station Dilwan. Special report reached the J. M. I. C. , Kapurthala on 6.11.1994 at 10 a. m. The prosecution to prove its case, brought into the witness-box dr. On the basis of this statement, f. I. R. Ex. PC/1 was recorded on 5.11.1994 at 5.15 p. m. at Police Station Dilwan. Special report reached the J. M. I. C. , Kapurthala on 6.11.1994 at 10 a. m. The prosecution to prove its case, brought into the witness-box dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1, Ravinder Singh PW-2, Karaj Singh PW-3, HC pargat singh PW-4, Constable Shinder Pal PW-5, Jasbir Singh PW-6, HC harbans Singh pw-7, Karam Sigh PW-8, Atma Singh PW-9, Satnam Singh PW-10, SI som Raj pw-11, Balwinder Singh PW-12, SI Harbhajan Singh PW-13 and Dr. Ashok dhingra PW-14. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that there is an unexplained delay of 17 hours in lodging of the F. I. R. and 20 hoursdelay in the special report reaching the J. M. I. C. , Kapurthala. The alleged occurrence had taken place on 5.11.1994 at 2.30 p. m. in the area of Village Bhandal Bet (Police station dilwan ). Statement Ex. PC of Karam Singh PW-8, was recorded on the same day at 4.30 p. m. by SI Som Raj PW-11 and formal F. I. R. Ex. PC/1 came into existence at 5.15 p. m. The special report reached the Illaqa Magistrate on 6.11.1994 at 10 a. m. The occurrence as per Karam Singh PW-8 took place in Village banna Mal, but as per the statement of the Investigating Officer SI Som Raj PW-11, the occurrence had taken place in Village Bhandal Bet. In column No.1 of the inquest report Ex. PD, the place where the dead-body was discovered, is the area of village Bhandal Bet. Karam Singh PW-8 in fact was not present at the place of occurrence. As per his own testimony, he has not stated that his son pargan Singh was shot in the area of Village Bhandal Bet, but he has stated that the dead-body of Pargan Singh was found in the area of Village Banna Mal. Similarly, the investigating Officer SI Som Raj PW-11 has also stated that the occurrence took place in Village Bhandal Bet and as per the inquest report, the place where the dead-body was recovered, was from Village Bhandal Bet. There is delay in lodging of the F. I. R. and the special report reaching the J. M. I. C. The sole reason for this was that confabulations and consultations were taking place to falsely implicate the appellants. There is delay in lodging of the F. I. R. and the special report reaching the J. M. I. C. The sole reason for this was that confabulations and consultations were taking place to falsely implicate the appellants. It has come in the evidence of Dr. Anoop Kumar pw-1 that a mob of 15 to 20 persons was present outside his office. The mob had given a beating to Dr. S. S. Padda and further, the mob threatened Dr. Anoop kumar, that if he did not add two pellets of bigger size in the vial, he would also meet the same fate. These two pellets Exs. P28 and P29 were handed over to him by some persons, from the mob and he was forced to put the same in the vial ex. P16. 7. Gurmel Singh Cheema, M. L. A. , Ex-Deputy Minister was a member of the unruly mob. Karam Singh PW-8 in his testimony, has stated that the complainant party is related to Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA. In the intimation sent to the police ex. DA, Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 has stated, that after some time of the conclusion of the post-mortem, the mob gathered in the hospital premises and started threatening him. At that time, Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA, Sultanpur and some s. H. O. on duty, conveyed to him that two more pellets which were brought by some other persons in the mob from somewhere, must be sent along with the other pellets, recovered from the dead-body and only then the mob will be pacified. 8. Thereafter Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 opened the seal of the glass vial and put these two pellets in the vial. SI Som Raj PW-11 in his testimony has also stated, that the doctor who had conducted the post-mortem, was attacked by a mob. It is clear from the statement of these witnesses, that tremendous political pressure and also pressure of the mob, was being put on the doctors to tamper with the evidence and add two bigger pellets in the vial. Interference in the investigation started right from the beginning. The police in fact, were helping the complainant party due to political pressure. 9. The motive for the commission of the offence has not been consistent. Karam Singh PW-8 while recording the F. I. R. Ex. Interference in the investigation started right from the beginning. The police in fact, were helping the complainant party due to political pressure. 9. The motive for the commission of the offence has not been consistent. Karam Singh PW-8 while recording the F. I. R. Ex. PC/1 has stated, that his son Pargan Singh had contested the Panchayat elections against puran singh Sarpanch. Puran Singh father of appellants Charanjit Singh alias channa and Palwinder Singh alias Pinda had won the elections. Pargan Singh filed a complaint with the authorities and got Puran Singh suspended. Puran singh filed an appeal and got a stay order in his favour. Appellants did not like this interference. In his testimony before the Court, Karam Singh PW-8 has changed the motive completely and has stated that in the year 1988, Niranjan Singh and his son Karnail Singh and Kartar Singh were murdered and in that case, karam Singh pw-8, Karamjit Singh and Gursharnan Singh were prosecuted. Niranjan singh and Karnail Singh were the grand-fathers of appellant Gurpreet Singh alias gopi. 10. He has further stated that in the year 1988, one Sadhu Singh of his village was murdered. Hira Singh (proclaimed offender) and his father Rattan Singh along with 11 other persons were prosecuted. Further, six months prior to the present occurrence, Rattan Singh father of Hira Singh (proclaimed offender) had lodged a protest with Karam Singh PW-8 that his son Pargan Singh had illicit relations with his daughter namely Bholi. These were the reasons why his son was murdered. 11. Atma Singh PW-9 has also not said anything about the grievance of the complainant and appellants regarding the election of Sarpanch. Atma singh PW-9 has not given any plausible explanation for his being present in the fields of karam Singh PW-8 at the time of occurrence. It has come in the evidence of this witness that the ridges of the potato crop had been mended one day earlier and they had gone on the day of occurrence, to repair the ridges with their hands. This is a concocted story, only to show that Atma Singh PW-9 was present. The other two eye-witnesses Gurpal Singh and Kashmir Singh were not brought into the witness-box. In fact, these two witnesses were independent witnesses who should have been produced by the prosecution. 12. Mr. This is a concocted story, only to show that Atma Singh PW-9 was present. The other two eye-witnesses Gurpal Singh and Kashmir Singh were not brought into the witness-box. In fact, these two witnesses were independent witnesses who should have been produced by the prosecution. 12. Mr. R. S. GHAI, Senior Advocate, counsel for the appellants has further assailed the case of the prosecution, that as per the statement of Karam singh PW-8, the distance from where the gun shots were fired by the appellants, was 30 to 35 karams. Similarly, Atma Singh PW-9 has stated that firing took place from a distance of 20 karams. The medical evidence does not corroborate the ocular account on this aspect. As per Dr. Ashok Dhingra PW-14, injury No.4 on the person of deceased Pargan Singh, charring was found. Further, as per his statement, 13 pellets and 4 metallic bullet pieces were recovered from the posterior lateral aspect of abdomen. Many card wads were also recovered from the abdomen and neck area. It is clear from the medical evidence that.12 bore gun shots were fired from a close range. If they were fired from a distance of 20 to 30 karams, charring could not have taken place. Nor could have the wads been recovered from the body of the deceased. 13. Recovery of guns from Charanjit Singh alias Channa (Ex. P41), palwinder Singh alias Pinda (Ex. P42) and Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi (Ex. P35)becomes doubtful and suspicious after taking into consideration the F. S. L. report ex. PBB. As per the F. S. L. report guns were deposited on 22.11.1994 and empties on 24.11.1994. Constable Satnam Singh PW-10 in his affidavit Ex. PL has stated that the empties were given to him on 11.11.1994. The Forensic Science laboratory authorities made some objections and on 15.11.1994 he returned the parcels to the police station. After removing the objections, he deposited the guns and empties with the F. S. L. on 21.11.1994. Recovery of these guns was made by the Investigating Officer SI Som Raj PW-11 on 18.11.1994. In fact, it is the investigating Officer who tampered with these guns in the intervening period. 14. After removing the objections, he deposited the guns and empties with the F. S. L. on 21.11.1994. Recovery of these guns was made by the Investigating Officer SI Som Raj PW-11 on 18.11.1994. In fact, it is the investigating Officer who tampered with these guns in the intervening period. 14. Learned counsel for the State has argued that there is no delay in lodging of the F. I. R. After the occurrence had taken place, the immediate concern of the complainant party was to take the body of deceased Pargan Singh to the hospital and to inform the police. F. I. R. Ex. PC/1 came into existence on 5.11.1994 at 5.15 p. m. Thereafter night fell. F. I. R. had to be taken to the residence of the J. M. I. C. , Kapurthala. It is after Constable Jasbir Singh reached kapurthala, that he came to know that the J. M. I. C. was residing in jalandhar, and he went to Jalandhar and after not finding his residence, he came back to the police station. It is on the next morning i. e. on 6.11.1994 that the special report was delivered at 10 a. m. No interference had taken place by any politician. The investigation Officer conducted investigation in a fair manner. Dr. Anoop kumar pw-1 has stated in his testimony, that Dr. S. S. Padda was not authorised to conduct the post-mortem. The complainant party got agitated, as they thought that dr. S. S. Padda was playing foul and was tampering with prosecution evidence to help the appellants. There wass no need for the mob to have two pellets of bigger size added in the vial. In fact, Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 has stated that he cannot say as to which kind of fire arm was used and also, whether these injuries were caused by a gun or a rifle. A second post-mortem was held on the same day by a team of doctors and Dr. Ashok Dhingra PW-14 has stated, that they conducted the post-mortem on 6.11.1994 at 4.45 p. m. The post-mortem report did not differ with the first one given by Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1. Intimation Ex. DA sent by dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 to the police is dated 8.11.1994. This document cannot be believed, as no reason has been given, as to why Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1. Intimation Ex. DA sent by dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 to the police is dated 8.11.1994. This document cannot be believed, as no reason has been given, as to why Dr. Anoop Kumar pw-1 kept silent for two days, after being threatened by the mob. It seems that dr. Anoop kumar PW-1 was in league with Dr. S. S. Padda, so that they could help the appellant party. The motive for the commission of the offence is very strong. Both the parties were at logger heads regarding the Panchayat elections. 15. Deceased pargan Singh had got Puran Singh father of appellants Charanjit Singh alias channa and Palwinder Singh alias Pinda unseated. Further, Karam Singh pw-8 along with others had been tried for the murder of Niranjan Singh and karamjit singh is the grand-father of Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi. About six months prior to the present occurrence, Rattan Singh father of Heera Singh (proclaimed offender)had lodged a protest with Karam Singh PW-8 that his son Pargan Singh had illicit relations with his daughter namely Bholi. 16. Both Karam Singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9 are the natural witnesses. Karam Singh PW-8 along with his deceased son Pargan Singh and others was standing in his own fields to repair the ridges of the potato crop when the appellants came armed with guns. It has come in the testimony of atma Singh pw-9 that both of them, i. e. Karam Singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9 used to help each other in agricultural work. By producing the other two eye-witnesses gurpal Singh and Kashmira Singh would have only added in quantity, but not to quality. 17. The place of occurrence has been clearly stated as being in Village bhandal Bet, but deceased Pargan Singh fell down in the area of Village banna mal. Bikramjit Singh Patwari DW-2 who is Patwari of both the villages bhandal bet and Banna Mal, has stated that both the villages are at a distance of 1 km. , but their land adjoins each other. After deceased Pargan Singh ran when he was being fired at, he fell in the fields in the area of Village Banna Mal from where the dead-body was recovered. As per the site plan, the distance of the place where the eye-witnesses were standing and the dead-body was recovered, is only a few yards. 18. The medical evidence corroborates the ocular account. As per the site plan, the distance of the place where the eye-witnesses were standing and the dead-body was recovered, is only a few yards. 18. The medical evidence corroborates the ocular account. Both Karam singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9 have stated, that the appellants got down from their tractors from 20 to 35 karams and started firing at Pargan Singh deceased. Pargan Singh started running. It was natural for the assailants to run after him. 19. After surrounding him in a semi-circle manner, they inflicted more gun shot injuries on him. Injury No.4 on the person of the deceased shows charring. It is clear that one of the assailants came close to the deceased and fired at him after he had fallen down. A number of shots were fired, some from a close range, and this is the reason that metallic bullets and card wads were recovered from the body. Karam Singh PW-8 being an old man of 60 years, could not have given computerised version of the account. 20. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. 21. Occurrence had taken place on 5.11.1994 at 2.30 p. m. The distance between the place of occurrence and Police Station Dilwan is 11 kms. The appellants armed with.12 bore guns came on tractors where Karam Singh pw-8 along with his son Pargan Singh deceased and five more persons were present, to mend the ridges of the potato crop, which they had made one day earlier. Appellants Charanjit Singh alias Channa, Palwinder Singh alias Pinda and gurpreet Singh alias Gopi got down from the tractors and with their.12 bore guns which are Exs. P41, P42, P35 respectively, fired towards Pargan Singh. Pargan singh at that time was at a distance of about 20/35 karams as per the statement of karam Singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9. On seeing the appellants and hearing the fire shots, Pargan Singh ran to save his life. The target of the appellants at that moment of time was Pargan Singh. Since Pargan Singh started to run, the appellants also naturally ran towards him and after he had fallen down due to the gun shot injury, more shots were fired at him. On seeing the appellants and hearing the fire shots, Pargan Singh ran to save his life. The target of the appellants at that moment of time was Pargan Singh. Since Pargan Singh started to run, the appellants also naturally ran towards him and after he had fallen down due to the gun shot injury, more shots were fired at him. One of the shots which is injury no.4 was fired from a close range, as it shows charring.7 to 9 shots were fired not from very close range, as no charring or blackening is there on these injuries. Wads were found only in the abdomen and neck injuries. We cannot look over and throw aside this fact that 13 pellets were recovered from the body of the deceased as per the testimony of Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1. It is due to the indiscriminate firing done by the appellants, that some pellets entered, but some missed the body of the deceased. There are no less than seven injuries on the person of the deceased. Injuries No.1,3,4,5 and 6 had inverted margins. Injury No.2 corresponded to injury No.1. Injury No.1 was a lacerated wound on the dorsum of left wrist with the underlying bone being fractured. As per the statement of dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1, 13 pellets were recovered from the right lung and intestines.4 metallic bullet pieces were recovered from the posterior lateral aspect of left side of the abdomen. Many card wads were recovered from the abdomen and neck. We can safely conclude that though a number of shots were fired, but the injuries having inverted margins were the ones where the pellets had entered.13 pellets and 4 metallic bullets which were recovered from the body of the deceased are not much in number, when we see that there were a number of assailants armed with.12 bore guns firing at the deceased. In fact, most of them though fired towards the deceased, but their gun shots did not hit Pargan singh deceased. Karam Singh PW-8 an old man of 60 years could not have given a graphic account in Court, as to which gun shot injury of which appellant entered the body of the deceased and which fire missed Pargan Singh. There is only one injury i. e. injury No.4 which shows charring. No other injury has charring or blackening. Karam Singh PW-8 an old man of 60 years could not have given a graphic account in Court, as to which gun shot injury of which appellant entered the body of the deceased and which fire missed Pargan Singh. There is only one injury i. e. injury No.4 which shows charring. No other injury has charring or blackening. This shows that the appellants fired at the deceased from a distance. 22. It is one of the assailants who came forward and then fired that one shot which is injury No.4 where charring is present. In fact, the medical evidence corroborates the ocular account. Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 it seems was trying to help the appellants when the complainant party got agitated. Karam Singh PW-8 is a natural witness. The occurrence had taken place during day time and in broad day light. He will not let the actual culprits go scot free and falsely implicate some others for the murder of his own son. In his testimony before the Court, he has dwelled on both Pargan Singh and puran singh having fought elections. He has also further elaborated that apart from this grievance, there is a running feud going on between the appellants and the complainant party. He has stated that in the year 1988, Niranjan Singh and his son karnail Singh and one person by the name of Kartar Singh were murdered. Karam singh PW-8 along with Karamjit Singh and Gursharan Singh was prosecuted. 23. Niranajan Singh and Karnail Singh were the grandfathers of appellant gurpreet singh alias Gopi. Further, in 1988, one Sadhu Singh of his village was murdered. Hira Singh (P. O.) and his father Rattan Singh and 11 other persons were prosecuted. Rattan Singh father of Hira Singh (P. O.) about six months prior to this occurrence lodged a protest with Karam Singh PW-8, that his son pargan singh deceased had developed illicit relations with his daughter, namely bholi. These were the different reasons he gave for the appellants to commit the murder of his son Pargan Singh. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the motive has been given as Panchyat elections in the F. I. R. Ex. PC/1. This argument of the learned counsel does not cut much ice, as the occurrence of the year 1988, and the dispute in the Panchayat elections are a matter of record. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the motive has been given as Panchyat elections in the F. I. R. Ex. PC/1. This argument of the learned counsel does not cut much ice, as the occurrence of the year 1988, and the dispute in the Panchayat elections are a matter of record. In fact, the assertions made by Karam Singh PW-8 have gone unchallenged. The motive given for the commission of offence in the F. I. R. Ex. PC/1 is the one which immediately triggered the appellants into action, as when they reached the place of occurrence, a lalkara was raised to eliminate pargan Singh, but nothing was said as to the elimination of Karam Singh pw-8. Karam Singh PW-8 would not have been the target, also as the dispute regarding him in the year 1988 had gone into the background, whereas the latest dispute was that of Panchayat elections. 24. Similarly, Atma Singh PW-9 has also reiterated what Karam Singh pw-8 has stated. Atma Singh PW-9 belongs to the same village to which karam singh PW-8 belongs. In villages, agriculturists help each other when there is rush of work. He has corroborated the version given by Karam Singh PW-8. Atma singh PW-9 has stated that his land is at a distance of 1 km. from the place of occurrence. On the day of occurrence he had come to help Karam Singh pw-8 in the making of ridges in the potato crop. 25. Much stress has been laid by the counsel for the appellants, on the fact that the body of the deceased was found from Village Banna Mal. The occurrence had taken place in the fields of Karam Singh PW-8 in Village bhandal bet. Bikramjit Singh Patwari DW-2 has stated that he is a Patwari of both the villages Bhandal Bet and Banna Mal. The land of both the villages is adjacent to each other. It is clear that deceased Pargan Singh while trying to save his life, crossed over the boundary and fell in the area of Village Banna Mal where he was shot. The site plan clearly shows the distance between the place of occurrence and the place where the dead-body was found, being a few yards. 26. It is clear that deceased Pargan Singh while trying to save his life, crossed over the boundary and fell in the area of Village Banna Mal where he was shot. The site plan clearly shows the distance between the place of occurrence and the place where the dead-body was found, being a few yards. 26. Learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that the police and the politicians especially Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA being the relative of Karam Singh PW-8 was interfering in the investigation and helping the complainant party. Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA was heading a mob and trying to intimidate Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 to put in two metallic substances in the vial. Though in his testimony before the Court, Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 has stated that 20 to 30 persons were there in the mob, but in his complaint to the police ex. DA, though he has mentioned the name of Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA, and has stated that some S. H. O. had conveyed to him that two more pellets be put in the vial and then only the mob will be pacified, the number of persons in the mob has not been mentioned. Complaint Ex. DA is dated 8.11.1994 while the post-mortem was conducted on 6.11.1994 at about 10.30 a. m. Some persons of the complainant party must have got infuriated on seeing Dr. S. S. Padda and Dr. R. P. Bhola performing the post-mortem, though they were not authorised to do so. Dr. Anoop kumar PW-1 has stated that there was no order for Dr. S. S. Padda to assist him in the post-mortem examination. Further, he has stated that he did not seek any permission from the Civil Surgeon or the S. M. O. for Dr. S. S. Padda to assist him. 27. Further, he did not obtain the signatures of Dr. R. P. Bhola and dr. S. S. Padda on the post-mortem report. Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 after two days of performing the post-mortem, sent complaint Ex. DA to the police, so that the persons who had objected to Dr. S. S. Padda and Dr. R. P. Bhola being present during the post-mortem, be subdued, so that they may not complain against him to higher authorities. If a unruly mob had gathered on 6.11.1994, Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 would have immediately informed his seniors, so that the police came into action. S. S. Padda and Dr. R. P. Bhola being present during the post-mortem, be subdued, so that they may not complain against him to higher authorities. If a unruly mob had gathered on 6.11.1994, Dr. Anoop Kumar PW-1 would have immediately informed his seniors, so that the police came into action. Gurmel singh Cheema,mla being present, does not go here or there. It has come in the evidence of Karam Singh PW-8 that Gurmel Singh Cheema, MLA was his relative. It was natural for him to come to grieve and to assist the complainant party, if they needed any help. 28. Recoveries of gun Ex. P41 from Charanjit Singh alias Channa, gun ex. P43 from Palwinder Singh alias Pinda and gun Ex. P35 from Gurpreet singh alias Gopi were made on the basis of disclosure statement made by them on 18.11.1994. Though it has been stated by both Karam Singh PW-8 and atma singh PW-9 that Sukhjit Singh alias Sukha was also armed with.12 bore gun, but no recovery was made from him. The F. S. L. report Ex. PBB has stated that the cartridges mark C1, C2, C3 and C4 have been fired from DBBL guns no. C/2 6769 and gun No.30001-93. Further, it has stated that the wads and pellets contained in parcels "h" and "i are of.12 bore size. Rest of the cartridges could not be recovered by the Investigating Officer, but the ones which were recovered, matched with the gun Ex. P35. No recovery of gun was made from Sukhjit singh alias Sukha, though Karam Singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9 have specifically stated in their testimony, that he had fired from his.12 bore gun. Constable satnam Singh PW-10 in his affidavit Ex. PL has explained the reasons as to why the empties and the guns were brought back and after removing the objections he re-deposited the same on 21.11.1994. This affidavit Ex. PL has gone unchallenged. He has stated that he re-deposited three parcels and one parcel of empty cartridges and a parcel of DBBL gun sealed with the seal of "ns", total 13 seals having the signatures of Miss Manju Rana, JMIC, Kapurthala, and one parcel of two empty cartridges of.12 bore sealed with the seal of "hsm" total 5 seals and sample seal of "sr" and "hsm" and certain other articles were also deposited by him. From this affidavit, the number of empty cartridges deposited with the F. S. L. were four. 29. The defence has produced Sohinderpal Singh Bawa, S. P. DW-1 who re-investigated the case. In his testimony before the Court he has stated that he took oral orders from the S. S. P. , but did not submit any written report to the s. S. P. , Kapurthala regarding his re-investigation. He has further stated that si som Raj PW-11 and D. S. P. Bakshish Singh had also investigated the case, but they had not found any of the appellants innocent in the investigation. This witness does not help the appellants much, as he re-investigated the case on his own, without taking orders from his seniors. 30. We are of the considered opinion that appellants Charanjit Singh alias Channa, Palwinder Singh alias Pinda and Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi committed the murder of Pargan Singh son of Karam Singh. Their conviction and sentence is maintained. 31. Though both Karam Singh PW-8 and Atma Singh PW-9 have stated that Sukhjit Singh alias Sukha also fired from.12 bore gun, but no recovery was made from him. He seems to have been roped in. The case qua him is doubtful and he is given the benefit of doubt. Criminal Appeal No.472-DB of 1999 qua sukhjit Singh alias Sukha is accepted and he is acquitted of the charge framed against him. Criminal Appeal No.472-DB of 1999 qua Gurpreet Singh alias gopi is dismissed. 32. While going through the judgment of the trial Court, we find that one of the proclaimed offenders Jagjit Singh alias Jaggo has been found innocent by the trial Court and Hira Singh (P. O.) has been found guilty in absentia. This the trial Court could not have done so as they did not face trial. The part of hira singh (P. O.) being found guilty and qua Jagjit Singh alias Jago being found innocent is set aside. Both the proclaimed offenders Jagjit Singh alias jaggo and hira Singh will have to face trial, as and when they surrender before the trial court or arrested.