Judgment Uma Nath Singh, J. 1. This common judgment shall also dispose of connected Criminal Appeal No. 684-DB of 2002 (Janak Raj V/s. State of Punjab), as both the cases arise out of the Sessions Case No. 109 dated 28-9-1996 (BT No. 60 dated 2-1-2002), decided on 13-8-2002 by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Sangrur, holding all the accused-appellants guilty of offences under Section 148, IPC and also under Section 302, IPC read with Section 149, IPC, and sentencing them each to undergo RI for one year on the first count and RI for life on the second count. 2. The prosecution case is based on the FIR (Ex. PK/1) dated 26-7-1996 recorded at 9.30 p.m. on a statement (Ex. PK) of Piara Singh made to SHO Ashok Mohan of Police Station Moonak. The FIR was registered under Section 307, IPC read with Section 149, IPC and also under Section 148, IPC, for attempting to murder Dauli Singh. On the death of Dauli Singh, the offence under Sections 307/149 was converted into Sections 302/149, IPC. The special report was sent to JMIC, Sunam, at 4.00 a.m. on 27-7-1996. In his statement (Ex. PK), complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) stated that he is an agriculturist. On the date of incident, he along with his brothers Balbir Singh and deceased Dauli Singh, and his mother Dalip Kaur, was returning home after doing works in the fields, situated towards Hamirgarh side. The incident took place after they had reached the katcha path, leading from their village to village Bhathooan at about 6.00 p.m. in the evening. Accused-appellants Nihal Singh, Nikka Singh. Bhola Singh, Janak Raj and Suresh Kumar were armed with gandasa whereas, another accused Pargat Singh was carrying a kirpan accused-appellant Amarjit Kaur, widow of Santokh Singh, also accompanied them and was standing outside the shop of accused Janak Raj. Accused Amarjit Kaur raised a lalkara saying that "they would teach Dauli Singh a lesson for stopping Nihal Singh and Janak Raj from visiting her house." In the meanwhile, appellant Pargat Singh gave a kirpan blow on the right leg of deceased Dauli Singh who immediately collapsed. Accused Amarjit Kaur raised a lalkara saying that "they would teach Dauli Singh a lesson for stopping Nihal Singh and Janak Raj from visiting her house." In the meanwhile, appellant Pargat Singh gave a kirpan blow on the right leg of deceased Dauli Singh who immediately collapsed. While the deceased was lying on the ground, other accused caused gandasa blows on various parts of his body; accused Nihal Singh caused gandasa blows on the back side of his neck; accused Janak Raj from the sharp edged side of gandasa on his forehead; accused Suresh Kumar on the back side in the middle portion of the shoulders; accused Nihal Singh on the left arm, and accused-appellant Bhola Singh from the sharp edged side on the front side of the left leg. Deceased Dauli Singh, who was also carrying a gandasa caused assaults to the accused in self defense. His gandasa broke down in the process of exchange of blows. According to the complainant, his brother Balbir Singh and mother raised alarms shouting "do not kill" "do not kill". However, all the accused-appellants still continued with their attacks on the deceased who was lying on the ground. He further stated that accused-appellants Amarjit Kaur and Nihal Singh had given lalkaras and threatened that if they went near the deceased, they would also be killed. Hence, they did not come near the deceased out of fear. After inflicting injuries, all the accused had run away with their respective weapons. Deceased Dauli Singh was related to accused Amarjit Kaur as brother-in-law (sisters husband) and she Is a widow. Accused Janak Raj and Nihal Singh used to visit her house with bad intention, which was objected to by the deceased. On account of that grudge, all the accused committed the murder of deceased Dauli Singh. The deceased was brought to the Government Hospital, Moonak, by the complainant and his mother for treatment. The Doctor referred him to Sangrur hospital. After arranging a car, the complainant sent his mother with deceased Dauli Singh to Civil Hospital, Sangrur, and came to the Police Station for giving information. Initially, a Challan was laid in the Court of Illaqa Magistrate only against three accused, namely, Janak Raj, Suresh Kumar and Bihola Singh. Other accused-appellants namely, Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh and Amarjit Kaur were kept in Column No. 2 and they were not sent up for trial. Initially, a Challan was laid in the Court of Illaqa Magistrate only against three accused, namely, Janak Raj, Suresh Kumar and Bihola Singh. Other accused-appellants namely, Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh and Amarjit Kaur were kept in Column No. 2 and they were not sent up for trial. However, an application for their discharge filed by the prosecution was dismissed by the Magistrate. On consideration of the report under Section 173, Cr. P.C. charges under Sections 302 / 149 IPC, and Section 148, IPC were, thus, framed against all the seven accused. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records. 4. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses, whereas, the defense produced 7 defense witnesses. Dr. Parbhat Kumar (P.W. 1) conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of deceased Dauli Singh on 27-7-1996. Dr. G. B. Goyal (P.W. 2) had examined accused Suresh Kumar on 26-7-1996, and noticed one grievous injury. On the same day, he had also examined accused Janak Raj. According to P.W. 2, deceased Dauli Singh had been brought to the Primary Health Centre, Moonak, on 26-7-1996, at 8-45 p.m. and he had referred him to Civil Hospital. Sangrur, for medico legal examination. Mithu Singh (P.W. 3) is the Patwari. He prepared a scaled map (Ex. PH), Balbir Singh (P.W. 4) is the real brother of the deceased. He is an eye-witness of the incident. Surinder Kumar (P.W. 5) was posted as MHC at Police Station Moonak, in July, 1996. He tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex. P1), Gurnail Singh (P.W. 6) was posted as Police Constable in July, 1996, at Police Station Moonak. He also tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex. PJ), Piara Singh (P.W. 7) is the complainant and also an eye-witness of the incident. Karnail Singh (P.W. 8) was posted as a Constable at Police Station Moonak on 26-7-1996. He submitted the special report to the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sunam, and to other officers. He tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex. P.W. 8/A). Harnaib Singh (P.W. 9) was also posted as a Constable at Police Station Moonak on 28-8-1996. He tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex. P. W. 9/a). He had delivered a parcel in the office of the Chemical Examiner, Patiala. S.I. Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10) was posted at Police Post Bhutal Kalan, P.S. Moonak, on 26-7-1996. P.W. 8/A). Harnaib Singh (P.W. 9) was also posted as a Constable at Police Station Moonak on 28-8-1996. He tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex. P. W. 9/a). He had delivered a parcel in the office of the Chemical Examiner, Patiala. S.I. Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10) was posted at Police Post Bhutal Kalan, P.S. Moonak, on 26-7-1996. He had joined the investigation with SI/SHO Ashok Mohan. Inspector Ashok Mohan (P.W. 11) was posted at Police Station Moonak on 26-7-1996 as SHO. He recorded the statement (Ex. PK) of complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7). 5. Balbir Singh (P.W. 4) is the real brother of the deceased. He was accompanying his mother Dalip Kaur and complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) along with deceased from the fields towards the house. It was 6 Oclock in the evening. He has given the names of all the accused, who were armed variously at the time of the incident. According to this witness, all the accused-appellants were standing in front of the shop of accused-appellant Janak Raj. The motive for commission of offence was that deceased Dauli Singh used to stop accused-appellants Janak Raj and Nihal Singh from visiting the house of accused-appellant Amarjit Kaur. He has attributed precise roles and injuries to all the accused. However, he has conceded that his deceased brother Dauli Singh was also armed with a gandasa. In the process of self defence and warding off the attacks. Dauli Singh also caused some injuries to accused Janak Raj and Suresh Kumar. However, his gandasa was broken during the attack and it fell down on the ground. He, his another brother, and mother raised alarms pleading not to kill the deceased. Accused-appellant Amarjit Kaur gave a lalkara. Accused Amarjit Kaur and Nihal Singh asked this witness and other family members of the deceased not to come near him otherwise they would also be killed. After causing assaults, all the accused-appellants ran away from the scene of occurrence with their respective weapons. P.W. 4 has pointed out that accused-appellants Janak Raj and Nihal Singh who had illicit relations with accused-appellant Amarjit Kaur, used to visit her house. The deceased used to object to that. After the incident, the deceased was brought to the Civil Hospital, Moonak, in a tractor-trolley, and was, later on, referred to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. The deceased succumbed to the injuries. The deceased used to object to that. After the incident, the deceased was brought to the Civil Hospital, Moonak, in a tractor-trolley, and was, later on, referred to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. The deceased succumbed to the injuries. In his cross-examination, P.W. 4 has clarified that the deceased was married to Shinder Pal Kaur but she had left him and shifted to her native village Dhandia. Smt. Shinder Pal Kaur had left Dauli Singh just 9 or 10 days before his death. They had a son in the wedlock. He has denied the defence suggestion that the deceased was suffering from fits of insanity or he was ever treated in the Mental Hospital. He conceded that the deceased had once been tried upon a charge for causing injuries to one Hakam Singh of his village but was acquitted later on. It was an incident of 1994 only. The mother of P.W. 4 was also accompanying him and his brother because she used to serve food to them in fields. They started from their fields at 5.30 for home. As the time of incident, the sun was about to set. The entire incident took place within 10-15 minutes. They also tried to intervene. Pargat Singh caused the first injury to the deceased to be followed by Nihal Singh and thereafter all other accused surrounded the deceased. They all caused sufficient number of injuries. The deceased did not die on the spot. He was served with water. His another brother Jagsir Singh gave information about the incident to the village Panchayat, Jagsir Singh was present in the house at that time. Jagsir Singh came to know about the incident on the news being spread in the village. However, he has also stated that none of the villagers, including the Sarpanch and the Members of Panchayat, had come to the spot till they started for the hospital. P.W. 4 accompanied the deceased with his mother in a Tractor upto Moonak situated at a distance of 10-12 kms from the village. The deceased was referred to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. His brother complainant Piara Singh and mother also accompanied him in shifting the deceased. Witness Piara Singh (P.W. 7) had already informed the police at Moonak before that. The police came to his village and the house but SHO Ashok Mohan did not record his statement under Section 161, Cr. The deceased was referred to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. His brother complainant Piara Singh and mother also accompanied him in shifting the deceased. Witness Piara Singh (P.W. 7) had already informed the police at Moonak before that. The police came to his village and the house but SHO Ashok Mohan did not record his statement under Section 161, Cr. P.C. DSP Baldev Singh also visited his house and verified the prosecution case. This witness has denied any knowledge that the SP and the DSP had put four of the accused in column No. 2. Hence, they were not sent up for trial. Piara Singh (P.W. 7), the complainant, has supported the prosecution case. He has given a vivid description of the entire incident. He has stated that after giving first aid, deceased Dauli Singh was referred to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. He informed the Police Station Moonak, about the incident. He hired a car from Moonak to Sangrur to carry the deceased who succumbed to the injuries on the way. He is also a witness of the memos in regard to collecting a blood stained gandasa from the spot, blood stained earth and preparation of a sketch map (Ex. PL). On 14-8-1996, the police recovered the weapons of offence from accused Janak Raj, Suresh Kumar and Bhola Singh. He has stated that the deceased was declared dead at about 11.00 p.m. in the Civil Hospital, Sangrur, They reached the village at about 12-1 Oclock in the night. The police met him on his return to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur, in the morning. His statement under Section 161, Cr. P.C. was not recorded in the hospital. However, a Police Sub Inspector had come to the village in his absence when he was at Sangrur in the night. According to him, the Incident lasted for about 15-20 minutes. He has clarified that the deceased was inflicted injuries when he was lying on the ground. The accused were arrested after 10-15 days. He has also denied that deceased Dauli Singh was even admitted in Mental Hospital. He has corroborated that a DSP had come to enquire about the case after 1-2 days of the occurrence. He has stated that in the investigation conducted by the DSP, accused Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh alias Gurnail Singh and Amarjit Kaur were found to be innocent. He has corroborated that a DSP had come to enquire about the case after 1-2 days of the occurrence. He has stated that in the investigation conducted by the DSP, accused Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh alias Gurnail Singh and Amarjit Kaur were found to be innocent. Thus, P.W. 4 and P.W. 7, being the eye-witnesses, have supported the prosecution case in toto. They carried the deceased to Primary Health Centre, Moonak, where he was given first aid. Complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) also carried the deceased to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur, on being referred, after informing the police about the incident. Dr. G. B. Goyal (P.W. 2), Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Moonak, has stated that on 26-7-1996 at about 8.45 p.m. deceased Dauli Singh had been brought to Primary Health Centre, Moonak, by complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) and his mother. He had referred the deceased to the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. Dr. Prabhat Kumar (P.W. 1], Emergency Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sangrur, had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 27-7-1996. He has stated that the dead body was identified by one Magher Singh and complainant Piara Singh. On examination of the dead body, he noted the following injuries: 1. Incised wound 0 cm x 2.5 cms on the front of left half of forehead just below the hair line. The skin muscle and bone were cut in the line of the wound. Clotted blood was present. 2. Incised wound 3 cms x 1/2 cm muscle deep on the right side of forehead, just above the medial end of right eye-brow. Clotted blood was present. 3. Incised wound 14 cm x 3.5 cms on the right lateral aspect of upper part of neck horizontally placed extending from behind the ear cutting mastoid process, skin muscle of neck, vessels and nervous cut. Clotted blood was present. 4. Incised wound 1 cm x 1/4 cm on the front of right cheek in zygomatic area. Clotted blood was present. 5. Incised wound 10 cms x 1 cm on the back of lower part of neck, muscles and skin and bones were cut in the line of wounds. Wound was horizontally placed. Clotted blood was present. 6. Incised wound 7 cms x 2.5 cms on the front of upper part of left arm, just below axilla. Clotted blood was present. Skin and muscle deep wound. 7. Wound was horizontally placed. Clotted blood was present. 6. Incised wound 7 cms x 2.5 cms on the front of upper part of left arm, just below axilla. Clotted blood was present. Skin and muscle deep wound. 7. Abrasion 1-1/2 cms x 1 cm on the front of the medial aspect of left eye brow with clotted blood. 8. Abrasion 4.5 cms x 1/4 cm on the lateral aspect of the lower deltoid area of left arm. Clotted blood was present. 9. Incised wound 5 cms x 2.5 cms on the lateral aspect of middle of left arm with tailing on the anterior aspect 2.5 cms long in the shape of sharp edge abrasion. Clotted blood was present. The wound was skin muscle deep. 10. Incised wound 15 cms x 8 cms on the back of left elbow and upper part of left forearm. Radius and ulna were cut in upper part of the wound, with cut of vessels and muscles and elbow joint was lying open. Clotted blood was present. 11. Incised wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the medial aspect of left thigh 10 cms above knee. 12. incised wound 5 cms x 2 cms with bone coming out of the wound (cut end of tibia) on the front left leg 10 cms below the knee. Clotted blood was present. Muscle cut. 13. Incised wound 3.5 cms x 1 cm on the front of right leg just below tibia tuber-osity bone cut in the line of wound. Clotted blood was present. 14. Abrasion 3 cms. x 1 1/2 cms on the back of right elbow. Clotted blood was present. 15. Incised wound 14 cms x 6 cms on the back of left side at the level of T-5 to T-8 vertebrae, just lateral to spine, skin and muscle deep wound, 16. Incised wound 9 cms x 1 cm on the left lower part of back just above sacrum , and iliac joint. Skin and muscle deep. Clotted blood was present. 17. Abrasion 5 cms x 3 cms on the lateral aspect of right deltoid area. 18. Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on the lateral aspect of upper part of right arm, 11 cms below shoulder. On dissection, clotted blood was present in subcutaneous tissue. Skin and muscle deep. Clotted blood was present. 17. Abrasion 5 cms x 3 cms on the lateral aspect of right deltoid area. 18. Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on the lateral aspect of upper part of right arm, 11 cms below shoulder. On dissection, clotted blood was present in subcutaneous tissue. In the opinion of the Doctor, death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage, and cardio respiratory failure as a result of multiple injuries. All the injuries were found to be ante-mortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. He has also opined that injury Nos. 1, 4, 5, 9, 12, 13 and 15 could be the result of gandasa blow. The abrasions suffered by the deceased could be the result of fall or dragging or scuffle. According to the Doctor only injury Nos. 1, 4, 10, 12 and 13 (collectively) were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. He has also stated that he had sent a ruqa (Ex. PG) to the SHO of Police Station Sangrur on 26-7-1996 at 11.00 p.m. The dead body was accompanied by the relatives of the deceased and not by the police. He has clarified that throughout in the intervening night of 26/27-7-1996, no police official had contacted the doctor. This also supports the statement of complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) that the police had met him only in the morning. He has stated that the rigor mortis was in full swing. There was presence of food in the stomach of the deceased. It means that he had taken food just 3-4 hours prior to the death. It supports the eye-witnesses accounts of P.W. 4 and P.W. 7 that they had taken meal together having been served by their mother. Constable Gurmail Singh (P.W. 6), in his cross-examination, has supported the testimony of complainant Piara Singh (P.W. 7) that he along with SI Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10) had come to mortuary at Civil Hospital, Sangrur. They had also gone to the village of the deceased in the intervening night of 26/27-7-1996 at 00.30 a.m. They had reached the Civil Hospital, Sangrur, before sunrise. Jarnail Singh (P.W. 8) had handed-over a special report to the Magistrate concerned in an envelope at about 4.00 a.m. SI Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10) was posted at Police Post Bhutal Kalan, PS Moonak, on 26-7-1996. Jarnail Singh (P.W. 8) had handed-over a special report to the Magistrate concerned in an envelope at about 4.00 a.m. SI Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10) was posted at Police Post Bhutal Kalan, PS Moonak, on 26-7-1996. He had joined the investigation with SHO Ashok Mohan (P.W. 11). He had reached the Civil Hospital, Sangrur, and stayed there. He has admitted that on the next date of the incident, i.e. 27-7-1996, complainant Piara Singh had met them. He has stated that the inquest report (Ex. PC) was prepared by Ashok Mohan (P.W. 11), Complainant Piara Singh and one Magher Singh had given the statements under Section 175, Cr. P.C. During the course of investigation, necessary articles were collected. The same were sealed and the seal was handed-over to Piara Singh (P.W. 7). This Police Officer is a witness of recovery memo (Ex. PN) along with complainant Piara Singh. On 14-8-1996, vide recovery memo (Ex. PN), broken gandasa of the deceased was seized and made into parcel. The recovery memos (Ex. P2 and Ex. P3) as such were also attested by him with complainant Piara Singh. This official witness was entrusted with the investigation on 14-8-1996. According to him, all the accused had been arrested by SHO Ashok Mohan on 12-8-1996 itself. He has clarified that accused Suresh Kumar, Bhola Singh and Janak Raj suffered disclosure statements, and pursuant thereto, recovery of weapons of offence was effected. The accused had suffered disclosure statements before him on 14-8-1996, on their interrogation. Inspector Ashok Mohan (P.W. 11) investigated the case Initially. He recorded the statement of complainant Piara Singh (Ex. PK) and on DDR No. 33, which was recorded at 9-30 p.m. on 26-7-1996, FIR No. 55 was registered on 26-7-1996 under Section 307 read with Section 149, IPC and Section 148, IPC at Police Station, Moonak, P.W. 11 being accompanied by a police team had collected necessary papers and reached the Civil Hospital, Sangrur. He had given the request (Ex. PB) for conducting post-mortem. He also prepared a site plan (Ex. P.W. 11/A) and collected necessary articles during investigation. He has stated that his seal, after use, was handed over to Piara Singh (P.W. 7). He also raided the houses of the accused but they could not be located. All the accused were produced only on 12-8-1996 by Sarpanch Surjit Singh. He also prepared a site plan (Ex. P.W. 11/A) and collected necessary articles during investigation. He has stated that his seal, after use, was handed over to Piara Singh (P.W. 7). He also raided the houses of the accused but they could not be located. All the accused were produced only on 12-8-1996 by Sarpanch Surjit Singh. He prepared the inquest report as stated in evidence by Nirmal Singh (P.W. 10). He also got the medical examination of accused Suresh Kumar and Janak Raj done vide the Medico Legal Reports (Ex. PD and Ex. PE). He seized the clothes of accused Janak Raj and Suresh Kumar and deposited with Moharrir Head Constable Surinder Kumar. He also deposited the parcel belonging to deceased Dauli Singh and his broken gandasa with Moharrir Head Constable on 12-8-1996. He denied the defence suggestion that Dauli Singh was suffering from mental disorder. He has conceded in his cross-examination that as per police investigation by the DSP and the SP, Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh and Amarjit Kaur were found to be innocent. They were not challenged and were kept in column No. 2. Accused Bhola Singh, Suresh Kumar and Janak Raj were put up for trial by the police. They also suffered disclosure statements and recovery of weapons pursuant thereto. In his statement under Section 313, Cr. P.C. accused Bhola Singh has pleaded false implication. Accused Suresh Kumar, in his statement under Section 313, Cr. P.C. has stated that deceased Dauli Singh was suffering from mental disorder. He opened attack with gandasa and caused injuries to them. They raised alarms. They were saved by the villagers. They have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated. Accused Jahak Raj, in his statement under Section 313, Cr. P.C. has also given a similar explanation that the deceased suffered fits of mental disorder. He was admitted in the hospital. He opened attack on them and caused injuries. They raised lalkara and the villagers rescued them. He did not commit any offence and has been falsely implicated in the case. Dr. G. B. Goyal (P. W. 2) had medically examined accused Suresh Kumar on 26-7-1996 at 9.30 p.m., and found the following injuries: 1. An incised wound of 6 cms x 2.5 cms x muscle deep on the back of left forearm, 10 cms below the elbow joint. Clotted blood was present. Dr. G. B. Goyal (P. W. 2) had medically examined accused Suresh Kumar on 26-7-1996 at 9.30 p.m., and found the following injuries: 1. An incised wound of 6 cms x 2.5 cms x muscle deep on the back of left forearm, 10 cms below the elbow joint. Clotted blood was present. Crepitations around the wound were felt. There was no corresponding cut in the shirt. Advise x-ray. On the same day, he also medically examined accused Janak Raj and noted the injuries as under: 1. An incised wound of 11 cms x 2 cms x muscle deep, on the right side of back, 7 cms from midline and 1.5 cms below shoulder joint. The direction of the wound was from lateral to medial side. Clotted blood was present. There was a corresponding cut in the shirt and banian of the patient. Xray was advised. In his cross-examination, P.W. 2 has stated that he can identify accused Suresh Kumar and Janak Raj, whom he had medically examined. In the Chemical Examiners Report, the Serologist found blood stains on the articles. Besides the prosecution evidence, we have also considered the testimonies of the defence witnesses. 6 On a proper analysis of entire evidence on record, we are of the view that Crl. Appeal No. 684-DB of 2002 does not require any interference. Accused-appellants Janak Raj, Suresh Kumar and Bhola Singh were challenged by the police, and they have suffered disclosure statements. Two of them, namely, accused Janak Raj and Suresh Kumar, in their statements under Section 313, Cr. P.C. have admitted that they had received injuries at the hands of deceased Dauli Singh. Thus, their presence and participation are proved. That apart, Dr. G.B. Goyal (P.W. 2) also examined them on the date of the incident and noticed the aforesaid injuries on their bodies. The eye-witnesses accounts, the FIR, the post-mortem report and other evidence on records clearly support the prosecution case in respect of these appellants. That apart, accused Janak Raj had developed illicit relations with accused Amarjit Kaur, sister-in-law of the deceased, which was the motive for him to commit the offence. Hence, this Crl. Appeal No. 684-DB of 2002 is hereby dismissed. However, we are inclined to allow Crl. That apart, accused Janak Raj had developed illicit relations with accused Amarjit Kaur, sister-in-law of the deceased, which was the motive for him to commit the offence. Hence, this Crl. Appeal No. 684-DB of 2002 is hereby dismissed. However, we are inclined to allow Crl. Appeal No. 648-DB of 2002, for the reasons (i) that in the initial investigation conducted by the senior police officers of the level of the SP and the DSP, accused-appellants Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh and Amarjit Kaur were found to be innocent and (ii) that they have not suffered any disclosure statement, nor was there recovery of any weapon. One of the accused-appellants, namely, Amarjit Kaur has been attributed only a role of lalkara. She has been stated to be unarmed in the eye-witnesses accounts. These accused had not suffered any injury in the incident, unlike accused Janak Raj and Suresh Kumar. It has also come in the evidence that accused-appellant Nihal Singh is an old man with grand children. Other accused-appellants Pargat Singh and Nikka Singh appear to have been roped in because of their relationship with accused Janak Raj and Bhola Singh as brothers, respectively. Accused-appellant Amarjit Kaur is a widow. She appears to have been implicated in the case only because of her relation with accused Janak Raj by attributing a role of lalkara. Accordingly, conviction and sentences of appellants Nihal Singh, Pargat Singh, Nikka Singh and Amarjit Kaur are hereby set aside and the connected Crl. Appeal No. 648-DB of 2002 is, resultantly allowed. They are directed to be released forthwith if they are not on bail and if not wanted in any other case. In the event of these accused-appellants being on bail, their bail bonds shall stand discharged. As Crl. Appeal No. 684-DB of 2002 is dismissed, accused-appellants Janak Raj, Suresh Kumar and Bhola Singh shall remain in jail to serve out the sentences awarded by the trial Court and in case they have been released on bail, they shall surrender to their bail bonds to serve out the sentences.