JUDGMENT K.S.Garewal, J 1. Tajinder Singh (22) and Gurpiar Singh (20) were tried for the murder of Jit Singh @ Bhairo of Balran with ghops on October 26, 1995 at 10.30 p.m. Jit Singh suffered shock and haemorrhage and died immediately. Tajinder Singh and Gurpiar Singh were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, found guilty under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for life. They were also sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-each, in default of payment to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. 2. Gurpiar Singh filed Crl. Appeal No. 490 DB of 1998 through jail whereas Tajinder Singh @ Teji filed Crl. Appeal 562 DB of 1998 through counsel. Gurpiar Singh had also been impleaded as appellant 2 in the latter appeal. We shall dispose of both the appeals by this common judgment. 3. Jit Singh @ Bhairo had two brothers, Darshan Singh and Lila Singh. Darhsan Singh (PW-5) was married to Paramjit Kaur @ Pammi. Both Jit Singh and Lila Singh were unmarried. Lila Singh was the Mahant of a nearby dera. The two accused were familiar with Jit Singh and would often visit Jit Singh and Darshan Singh and party can drink. According to the prosecution, Gurpiar Singh had eye on Darshan Singh's wife Paramjit Kaur but Jit Singh did not appreciate this. 4. On the evening of October 26, 1995, Jit Singh had left his house at 7 p.m. in the company of the two accused but when he did not return till 10.30 p.m., his brother Darshan Singh (PW-5) and Lila Singh (PW-6) came looking for him to Tajinder Singh's house. They saw that the two accused and Jit Singh were sitting on a bed in the verandh of the house which abutted on a street. An electric bulb was also on. The accused and Jit Singh were quarreling with each other. Darshan Singh and Lila Singh asked Jit Singh to come with them. At that time the two accused were armed with ghops. Gurpiar Singh exhorted Tajinder Singh saying what was he waiting for. Jit Singh should be finished. Thereupon, Tajinder Singh pulled down Jit Singh from behind by his legs and Gurpiar Singh gave two ghop blows on Jit Singh's neck. Tajinder Singh also gave an injury on the right side of Jit Singh's neck and right shoulders. Gurpiar Singh exhorted Tajinder Singh saying what was he waiting for. Jit Singh should be finished. Thereupon, Tajinder Singh pulled down Jit Singh from behind by his legs and Gurpiar Singh gave two ghop blows on Jit Singh's neck. Tajinder Singh also gave an injury on the right side of Jit Singh's neck and right shoulders. An alarm was raised by Darshan Singh and Lila Singh, whereupon the two accused escaped with their ghops and Jit Singh died. Darshan Singh left Lila Singh by side of Jit Singh's body and informed Sarpanch Sainsi Singh of the village that Jit Singh had been killed by the accused. Thereafter, Darshan Singh and Sarpanch went to the Police Station, Moonak, and reported the matter. FIR was registered by SI Parshotam Lal (PW-8) at 12.30 a.m. past midnight on October 27, 1995, a special report was delivered to the Magistrate by 4 a.m. 5. The Investigator started the investigation from the place of occurrence. He reached the spot accompanied by HC Gurmail Singh. Jit Singh's body was found lying in the room of Tajinder Singh's house. A photographer also arrived at the spot and photographs of the dead body were taken. SI Parshotam Lal prepared the inquest report of the dead body. SI Parshotam Lal also collected blood from the floor of the house of Tajinder Singh's house where dead body was lying. A blood stained check chadra of the deceased, a blood stained check khes belonging to Tajinder Singh, two cots and two green colour bed sheet spread over cot was also recovered and taken into possession. Tajinder Singh's blood stained shirt, blood stained trousers, a blood stained parna and a pair of juties were also taken into possession from the spot. A site plan was prepared. After preparing inquest report, body was sent for post-mortem and the Investigating Officer commenced search for the accused. 6. Post-mortem was conducted by Dr. Suresh Kumar Singla, (PW3) at 2.20 p.m. on October 27, 1995 at Civil Hospital, Sangrur. The following injuries were found on the dead body:- “1. Stab wound with sharp margins 3 cm x 1.5 cm x muscle, trachea cut on the front of neck 6 cm above the medial end of left clavical just to the left of mid line. 2. The following injuries were found on the dead body:- “1. Stab wound with sharp margins 3 cm x 1.5 cm x muscle, trachea cut on the front of neck 6 cm above the medial end of left clavical just to the left of mid line. 2. Stab wound 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle, treacha cut on the neck near injury no.1, just to the right of mid line and 5 cm above the medial end of right clavicle. The margins of the wound were sharp. 3. Stab wound with sharp margins measuring 2.5 cm x 1 cm x 2 cm on the right side of neck on the outer side and lateral side of neck 8 cm above the right clavicle. 4. Stab wound with sharp margins 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep on the right upper arm on the posterior aspect 6 cm above the elbow. 5. Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on the posterior aspect of left forearm 15 cm above the wrist. 6. Abrasion 5 cm x 3 cm on the right leg on the front in the middle. 7. Abrasion 6 cm x 3 cm on the right leg 10 cm above the lower end of right leg. 8. Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on the right forearm just above the wrist. 9. Bruise 10 cm x 3 cm on the right thigh on the front in the middle.” 7. Both the accused were arrested by the Investigator on November 10, 1995 when they were produced before him by Bhagwan Singh Ex.Sarpanch. From the personal search of Tajinder Singh Rs. 20/-Crl. Appeal No. 490DB of 1998 was recovered. From the personal search of Gurpiar Singh a purse, a handkerchief with 'Gurpiar' embroided on one side and 'Pammi' embroided on the other, a post-card size photo of Gurpiar Singh and Pammi, a letter written by Pammi to Gurpiar Singh and another post-card size photo of Pammi with another woman were recovered and Rs. 15/-was also recovered. All these articles were taken into possession. 8. The Investigator also interrogated Mukesh Kumar, the owner of a Studio in Moonak, who testified that he had taken the photograph of Gurpiar Singh with a woman, developed and printed it. Photograph had been collected by Gurpiar Singh. The negative of the photograph was handed over to the police. 15/-was also recovered. All these articles were taken into possession. 8. The Investigator also interrogated Mukesh Kumar, the owner of a Studio in Moonak, who testified that he had taken the photograph of Gurpiar Singh with a woman, developed and printed it. Photograph had been collected by Gurpiar Singh. The negative of the photograph was handed over to the police. Both the accused were interrogated on November 10, 1995. A blood stained ghop was recovered from Tajinder Singh on the basis of his disclosure statement, from under wheat chaff stored in a room in his residential house. Likewise, from the possession of Gurpiar Singh, on the basis of his disclosure statement, a blood stained ghop was also recovered from wheat chaff stored at his residence. The recovered clothes and weapons were sent to Chemical Examiner for chemical examination, which were examined by Serologist who find the stains to be of human blood. 9. After completion of the investigation, accused were sent up for trial. At the trial, charges were framed against them under Section 302/34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 10. The main witnesses examined by the prosecution were Dr. Suresh Kumar Singla (PW-3), Darshan Singh (PW-5), Lila Singh (PW-6) and SI Parshotam Lal (PW-8). 11. After conclusion of the trial, the accused were examined without oath under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the various items of incriminating evidence led by the prosecution and pleaded innocence. 12. According to Tajinder Singh he had been falsely implicated. He and his wife were away from his house. His wife was on family way and has gone to her maternal parents for delivery. Tajinder Singh himself had been staying at Gurdwara Khel Sahib, Patiala since Diwali. He was apprehended from the gurdwara. Gurpiar Singh gave a flat denial and stated that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. 13. When called upon to enter defence, the accused examined Joginder Singh (DW-1), Bhagwant Singh (DW-2) and Rajinder Pal (DW3). Joginder Singh testified that on Diwali on October 23, 1995, Tajinder Singh's father Angrej Singh and he were together engaged in service at Gurdwara Khel Sahib. Tajinder Singh was also there with his father. Tajinder Singh often visited the gurdwara and stayed for 3-4 days. On this occasion, Tajinder Singh stayed at the gurdwara for about 4-5 days. After Diwali the police came to the gurdwara and arrested him. Tajinder Singh was also there with his father. Tajinder Singh often visited the gurdwara and stayed for 3-4 days. On this occasion, Tajinder Singh stayed at the gurdwara for about 4-5 days. After Diwali the police came to the gurdwara and arrested him. Bhagwant Singh (DW-2), Field Officer, Punjab Agricultural Development Bank Lehra Gaga testified that as per record of the bank, a loan of Rs. 99,700/-was sanctioned to Tajinder Singh under a scheme for 'unemployed'. The loan was still outstanding. Rajinder Pal, Deputy Manager, Primary Agricultural Development Bank, Lehra Gaga, testified that Tajinder Singh had taken loan of Rs. 99,700/-in three installments for a dairy under self-employment scheme. He had constructed a cattle shed and also purchased six animals. 14. During the trial, on March 11, 1998, Tajinder Singh filed an application that he be mentally examined by some doctor. Therefore, he was referred to Government Medical College and Hospital, Patiala with a request to constitute a board of two specialist to examine Tajinder Singh and report whether he was capable of defending himself. Consequently, Tajinder Singh was admitted to Psychiatric Ward of Medical College and Hospital, Patiala, where he was examined. Dr. Kuldeep Chand Sharma was examined as court witness in this regard and appeared as CW-1. 15. On April 18, 1998, Tajinder Singh was declared fit to stand trial. This order was passed on the basis of the evidence of Dr. Kuldeep Chand Sharma who stated that Tajinder Singh was of sound mind and capable of understanding all proceedings and making his defence. 16. The learned Trial Judge came to the conclusion that there was sufficient evidence to hold that the photographs and love letters showed extramarital relationship between Pammi (wife of Darshan Singh) and Gurpiar Singh-accused. This corroborated the eye account that Gurpiar Singh had an eye on Paramjit Kaur @ Pammi. Jit Singh deceased was the obstacle in this relationship developing. Furthermore, the eye witnesses had seen the two accused armed with ghops. According to the Medical Officer, four injuries, two by Tajinder Singh and two by Gurpiar Singh, could be caused by the ghops recovered from the two accused. Rest of the injuries were the result of dragging on any hard surface. Recoveries of clothes and other articles corroborated the eye witness account. The FIR had been lodged promptly and this also supported the eye witness account. Rest of the injuries were the result of dragging on any hard surface. Recoveries of clothes and other articles corroborated the eye witness account. The FIR had been lodged promptly and this also supported the eye witness account. Consequently, the prosecution case was accepted and the accused were convicted. 17. The main argument of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the presence of Darshan Singh (PW-5) and Lila Singh (PW-6) at the place of occurrence at the very time when Jit Singh was attacked by the accused was unnatural and improbable. Had the two brothers been present, they would certainly have intervened to save their brother Jit Singh. The occular evidence did not support by the medical evidence because the abrasions had not been explained. 18. It was also argued that if the extramarital affair between Gurpiar Singh and Paramjit Kaur @ Pammi was going on the accused would have motive only against Darshan Singh. And that too only Gurpiar Singh would have the motive, not Tajinder Singh. 19. The prosecution case was that the two accused and the deceased had been engaged in a drinking session but no alcohol was found in the body, no glass or bottle of liquor was found in the house. Therefore, the story of the deceased drinking with his assailants was a false one. 20. The most important factor in the present case is that Jit Singh was murdered in Tajinder Singh's house but no explanation, much less a satisfactory one, was forthcoming from Tajinder Singh in this regard. Secondly, the photographs of Paramjit Kaur had been recovered from Gurpiar Singh. A love letter written by her and a cream coloured silk handkerchief with 'Gurpiar' embroided one side and 'Pammi' on the other were recovered. Two photographs of Pammi, one of which was with Gurpiar Singh was also recovered. A written written love letter by Pammi addressed to Gurpiar Singh too was taken into possession. 21. All the above evidence certainly points to some form of infatuation or an affair between Darshan Singh's wife Paramjit @ Pammi and Gurpiar Singh accused. The dead person was Darshan Singh's brother Jit Singh who was a bachelor. The occurrence had taken place in Tajinder Singh's house, a person unrelated to any of the parties. Tajinder Singh offers no explanation. All the above evidence certainly points to some form of infatuation or an affair between Darshan Singh's wife Paramjit @ Pammi and Gurpiar Singh accused. The dead person was Darshan Singh's brother Jit Singh who was a bachelor. The occurrence had taken place in Tajinder Singh's house, a person unrelated to any of the parties. Tajinder Singh offers no explanation. For that matter, even Gurpiar Singh is unable to explain the photographs of Pammi found in his possession, in one of which he is shown standing by her side. The love letter tells its own story, and so does the handkerchief with their names embroided on it. 22. It is true that Gurpiar Singh possessed a strong motive to murder Darshan Singh but Jit Singh deceased was the person who was the hurdle between the two lovers. When a person stops two people from meeting each other it shows that he knows their secrets. That person knows that something is on between the two. This fact may not have been known to the woman's husband but in the present case it was known to the deceased. The affair between the two was evidenced and well corroborated by the articles recovered from Gurpiar Singh. 23. The medical evidence shows four stab wounds out of which three were around the neck. The 4th was on upper arm. There were also four abrasions and a bruise on both forearm and the right leg. The stab wounds are possible with the ghops. According to the Medical Officer, all the four stabs could be possible by a single weapon. Injuries 1 and 2 were individually sufficient to cause death whereas injuries 3 and 4 were not. 24. The Medical Officer confidently testified that injuries 1 to 4 were possible with the two ghops which were shown to him at the time of the trial. Injuries 5 to 8 could have been caused by the dragging of the deceased on a hard surface. 25. The above evidence coupled with the forensic evidence, presence of human blood on recovered clothes and bedding is sufficient to hold that Jit Singh was murdered with ghops in Tajinder Singh's house and there was evidence that something was on between Gurpiar Singh and sister-in-law of the deceased, about which the deceased had protested. 26. 25. The above evidence coupled with the forensic evidence, presence of human blood on recovered clothes and bedding is sufficient to hold that Jit Singh was murdered with ghops in Tajinder Singh's house and there was evidence that something was on between Gurpiar Singh and sister-in-law of the deceased, about which the deceased had protested. 26. The above analysis of oral as well as circumstantial evidence has convinced us that the accused were the murderers of Jit Singh deceased and the prosecution case was sufficiently corroborated through forensic/medical evidence. We hold that both the accused had been justifiably found guilty of the murder. 27. We find no merit in these appeals and the same are hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.