JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J. - Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals, i.e. CRA-D-681-DB and CRA-D-760-DB of 2004, therefore, these are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. These appeals are instituted against the judgment and order dated 14.07.2004, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Amritsar, in Sessions Trial No. 166 of 2003. Appellants Bachan Singh, Balbir Singh and Baldev Singh along with co-accused Mohan Singh, Charan Singh, Wazir Singh, Swaran Singh and Kashmir Singh, were charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302/148/149 IPC and Sections 27 and 29 of the Arms Act. 3. Appellant Baldev Singh was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 302 IPC. Appellants Bachan Singh and Balbir Singh were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 302/34 IPC. Appellant Balbir Singh was also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Appellant Baldev Singh was also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 29 of the Arms Act. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, co-accused Mohan Singh, Charan Singh, Wazir Singh, Swaran Singh and Kashmir Singh were acquitted of the charges framed against them. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Bachan Singh produced the death certificate dated 24.04.2008, stating that his client died during the pendency of appeal on 06.03.2008. Hence, CRA-D-681-DB of 2004 qua Bachan Singh stands abated, as already ordered on 03.02.2020. 5. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Tejinder Kaur wife of Tirath Singh lodged the report with SI Lal Singh to the effect that her father-in-law Bachan Singh owned 16 acres of land in village Dabowali. The land was partitioned. Tirath Singh was cultivating 3 acres of land of his share. On 04.11.2002 at about 11.00 AM, Tirath Singh went to his fields to plough the land with the tractor of Ranjit Singh, resident of village Manawala. The land was partitioned. Tirath Singh was cultivating 3 acres of land of his share. On 04.11.2002 at about 11.00 AM, Tirath Singh went to his fields to plough the land with the tractor of Ranjit Singh, resident of village Manawala. Tejinder Kaur and her son Pawandeep Singh also went with him. Tirath Singh and Ranjit Singh started ploughing the land with the tractor. Tejinder Kaur and her son Pawandeep Singh sat near the boundary line. In the meanwhile, all the accused came on scooters. Balbir Singh accused was armed with double barrel gun. Baldev Singh and Wazir Singh were armed with kirpans. Other accused were having dangs (sticks). Accused raised lalkara proclaiming to teach lesson to Tirath Singh for cultivating the land. Tirath Singh came down from the tractor and tried to run away to save his life. However, Balbir Singh fired shot from his DBBL gun, which hit on the right upper arm of Tirath Singh. He was chased by the accused. Baldev Singh snatched gun from Balbir Singh and fired two shots at Tirath Singh on his left shoulder and on the left side of his head. Wazir Singh gave kirpan blow on the person of Tirath Singh, while he was lying on the ground. They raised alarm. Accused ran away from the spot. Statement of Tejinder Kaur is Ex. PC, on the basis of which FIR Ex. PC/2 was recorded. The post-mortem examination was conducted. Police collected blood stained earth from the spot. One sheathed sword in broken condition was also taken into possession. Two empties of 12 bore gun were picked up from the spot. These were sealed. One tractor was also recovered. The clothes of the deceased were also taken into possession. Accused were arrested. Kirpan was taken into possession from Baldev Singh. Balbir Singh produced 12 bore gun and eight live cartridges, which were taken into possession. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 6. The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of its case. The accused were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution. They were convicted and sentenced, as noticed here-in-above. Hence, these appeals. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants have vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of its case. The accused were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution. They were convicted and sentenced, as noticed here-in-above. Hence, these appeals. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants have vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. Learned counsel appearing for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant have supported the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial court. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and record very carefully. 9. PW. 7 Dr. Ashok Channana had conducted the post-mortem examination on the body of Tirath Singh on 04.11.2002 at 4.50 PM. According to him, the dead body was brought to mortuary on 04.11.2002 at 2.05 PM from Pati Tabowali, Police Station Sadar Amritsar, whereas the police papers were submitted on 04.11.2002 at 4.30 PM by HC Raj Kumar. He noticed following injuries on the body of the deceased:- '(1) A lacerated oval wound 4 x 3 cm was present on outer aspect of left upper arm, 2.5 cm below point of shoulder. The lower margin was levelled and upper margin was overhanging. Clotted blood was present at shirt. Corresponding part of shirt was torn and fibers were turned inside. (2) An irregular lacerated wound 9 x 4.5 cm was present with clotted blood and obliquely placed on the front and left side of chest in the infraclavicular region over its medial 1/3rd. The underlying lacerated soft tissue was protruding out from the wound. On dissection, injury No. 1 communicated with injury No. 2 after injuring the intervening soft tissue structure and fracturing the left clavicle and underlying tissues. Clotted blood present at the site. Dark coloured infiltration was present in the surrounding structures. 12 blood stained deformed and intact pellets were recovered from the wound and track. The track was directed medially and horizontally. (3) A linear/oblique reddish brown abrasion 5 x 0.4 cm was present on the front and left side of chest, in the supramammary region. On dissection, the underlying rib was fractured. Clotted blood was present at the site, and in surrounding structures. The track was directed medially and horizontally. (3) A linear/oblique reddish brown abrasion 5 x 0.4 cm was present on the front and left side of chest, in the supramammary region. On dissection, the underlying rib was fractured. Clotted blood was present at the site, and in surrounding structures. (4) An irregular lacerated wound 23 x 7 cm obliquely placed was present on the left submandibular region, left temporal, left parietal and left occipital region of the head. The left half of mandible and underlying skull bones were fractured into multiple pieces. Clotted blood was present at the site. On dissection, left cerebral and cerebellar hemisphere were lacerated. Clotted blood was present at the site. 21 blood stained deformed and intact pellets were recovered from wound and track. Track was directed anteriorly. Clotted blood was present. (5) An irregular lacerated wound 9 x 4 cm with clotted blood was present on the anteromedial aspect on right upper arm in its middle. The underlying humerus was fractured. Clotted blood was present on the site. The corresponding part of the shirt was torn. On dissection, 13 blood stained and intact pellets were recovered from the wound and track. Clotted blood was present. Track was directed posteriorly. (6) An half moon shaped dark reddish coloured bruise 2 cm in diameter was present 1.5 cm above injury No. 5. (7) An oblique reddish abrasion 6 x 1.4 cm was present on the posterior lateral aspect of right forearm in its centre. (8) Multiple (4) dark reddish coloured bruises varying in size from 4 x 3 cm to 3.5 x 2.8 cm were present on the right inframammary region. (9) Multiple (7) dark reddish coloured abraded bruises varying in size from 6 x 0.4 cm to 2 x 0.2 cm were present on the left lateral and back and left side of chest on its lower one third. (10) An abraded bruise of dark reddish colour 4 x 2 cm was present in the infra scapular region of the chest. (11) Multiple (5) reddish brown abrasions varying in size from 0.2 x 0.2 cm to 0.4 x 0.2 cm were present on the back of right hand. (12) A dark coloured abraded bruise 6 x 1.5 cm was present on the left scapular region of the chest. (11) Multiple (5) reddish brown abrasions varying in size from 0.2 x 0.2 cm to 0.4 x 0.2 cm were present on the back of right hand. (12) A dark coloured abraded bruise 6 x 1.5 cm was present on the left scapular region of the chest. (13) Reddish brown abrasion 3 x 2 cm was present on the left knee.' The cause of death was laceration of brain as a result of injury No. 4, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injuries No. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 were as a result of discharge of fire arm. The probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was instantaneous to immediate and between death and post-mortem examination was about 6 to 12 hours. The post mortem report is Ex. PG. In his cross-examination, he was not in a position to say that from what distance, the assailants would have fired the gun shot. According to him, injuries No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 were caused by discharge of three shots of the gun. 10. PW. 3 Tejinder Kaur testified that Tirath Singh deceased was her husband. They were four brothers. Baldev Singh and Balbir Singh accused were also brothers of her husband. Her father-in-law owned 16 killas of land. The land was partitioned. Her husband also got his share. On 04.11.2002 at 11.00 AM, her husband Tirath Singh accompanied by her, Ranjit Singh and her son Pawandeep Singh went on a tractor to plough the land of his share. Ranjit Singh started ploughing the land with the tractor, while Tirath Singh, her husband, at that time was sitting on the mudguard. She and Pawandeep Singh were sitting on the boundary of the field. Bachan Singh accused, her father-in-law, along with Balbir Singh, Baldev Singh, Mohan Singh, Charan Singh, Wazir Singh, Swaran Singh and Kashmir Singh came on the spot. Balbir Singh was carrying DBBL gun. Baldev Singh and Wazir Singh were armed with kirpans. Others were carrying dangs (sticks). She identified the accused in the court. Balbir Singh fired a gun shot hitting on the right upper arm of her husband Tirath Singh. Tirath Singh tried to run away. He was overpowered by the accused at a distance of about killa. He was surrounded by the accused. Then he fell down. They all were raising lalkara at that time. She identified the accused in the court. Balbir Singh fired a gun shot hitting on the right upper arm of her husband Tirath Singh. Tirath Singh tried to run away. He was overpowered by the accused at a distance of about killa. He was surrounded by the accused. Then he fell down. They all were raising lalkara at that time. Baldev Singh accused took gun from Balbir Singh and fired shot which hit on the left shoulder and on the left side of head of Tirath Singh. Wazir Singh gave kirpan blow on the person of Tirath Singh. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the spot. In her cross-examination, she could not give the date when the family settlement took place. She did not know whether the family settlement was in writing. She was not aware of any civil litigation of her husband with Bachan Singh. Village Manawala was at a distance of 20/25 Kms. from the place of occurrence. The tractor was owned by her brother Ranjit Singh. He had come at 10.00 AM. He was all alone. She did not know khasra number of the field which was being ploughed at the time of occurrence. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination at 3.30/3.45 PM. The deceased had tried to run away towards Tabowali. The deceased fell down when he tried to run away. Baldev Singh took gun from Balbir Singh at the place where the deceased fell down. Nobody from the nearby houses came to the spot. 11. Statement of PW. 3 Tejinder Kaur is duly corroborated by PW. 4 Ranjit Singh. According to him, he started ploughing the land with tractor, while Tirath Singh was sitting on mudguard. Tejinder Kaur and Pawandeep Singh were sitting on boundary. At about 11.00 AM, all the accused came on the spot. Balbir Singh fired from his DBBL gun. The shot hit on the right upper arm of Tirath Singh. Tirath Singh tried to escape. He was overpowered at a distance of 1 killa. He fell down. Baldev Singh took gun from Balbir Singh and fired two shots, which hit on the left arm and left side of the head of Tirath Singh. Wazir Singh gave blows to Tirath Singh with kirpan. Accused ran away from the spot. In his cross-examination, he deposed that only one shot was fired by Balbir Singh accused. He fell down. Baldev Singh took gun from Balbir Singh and fired two shots, which hit on the left arm and left side of the head of Tirath Singh. Wazir Singh gave blows to Tirath Singh with kirpan. Accused ran away from the spot. In his cross-examination, he deposed that only one shot was fired by Balbir Singh accused. Balbir Singh had fired shot from a distance of 5/6 feet. Balbir Singh and the deceased were in the field, which was being ploughed when the shot was fired. Baldev Singh too had fired shot from a distance of 4/5 feet from the deceased. The accused did not object him from ploughing the field. He was on the tractor, when shot was fired by Balbir Singh. When the deceased got down from the tractor, he stopped the tractor. He also came down. At that time, the accused were at a distance of 15/20 karams from them. Deceased was at distance from the tractor, when first shot was fired. No pellet of the shot hit the tractor. He did not know whether the deceased himself had fallen down while running or he was overpowered by the accused. None of the accused came towards him. 12. PW. 9 Inspector Lal Singh deposed that he recorded the statement of Tejinder Kaur on 04.11.2002 vide Ex. PC. FIR was registered. Inquest proceedings were completed vide Ex. PK. He reached the spot. The body was sent for post-mortem examination. Blood stained earth was collected. One sheathed sword in broken condition was also taken into possession. Two empties of 12 bore were also recovered from the spot, which were sealed. One tractor was also taken into possession from the place of occurrence. Site plan was prepared. Baldev Singh produced kirpan at the time of his arrest. Balbir Singh produced 12 bore gun along with 8 live cartridges. These were taken into possession. In his cross-examination, he deposed that he had reached the place of occurrence at 1.30 PM. So many people had come there. Near the place of occurrence, residences of Majbis were there. The residents of those houses were not joined in the investigation. 13. What emerges from the evidence is that deceased Tirath Singh had requested PW. 4 Ranjit Singh to plough his fields. They went to his fields on 04.11.2002. At about 11.00 AM, accused came at the spot. Near the place of occurrence, residences of Majbis were there. The residents of those houses were not joined in the investigation. 13. What emerges from the evidence is that deceased Tirath Singh had requested PW. 4 Ranjit Singh to plough his fields. They went to his fields on 04.11.2002. At about 11.00 AM, accused came at the spot. Balbir Singh fired shot at Tirath Singh with DBBL gun. Thereafter, Tirath Singh was chased. Balbir Singh handed over the gun to Baldev Singh and Baldev Singh fired two shots at Tirath Singh. 14. PW. 7 Dr. Ashok Channana had noticed as many as 13 injuries on the person of deceased Tirath Singh. The cause of death, in his opinion, was laceration of brain as a result of injury No. 4, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. It was a fire arm injury. According to the FSL report Ex. PX, the right side firing mechanism of 12 bore DBBL gun was in working condition. Seven 12 bore cartridges marked L/1 to L/7 contained in parcel B were live cartridges. One 12 bore KF special cartridge marked M/1 contained in parcel B was a misfired cartridge. It was not possible to link 46 small lead pellets contained in parcel C with the 12 bore DBBL gun No. 3520-71. 15. According to the post-mortem report Ex. PG, twelve pellets were recovered from the wound, as far as injury No. 2 is concerned. Injury No. 2 was directed medially and horizontally. Twenty one pellets were also recovered from injury No. 4. This injury was directed anteriorly with clotted blood. Thirteen pellets were recovered from injury No. 5. This injury was directed posteriorly. 16. The prosecution has proved with the help of ocular as well as medical evidence that Tirath Singh died due to fire arm injuries. According to PW. 3 Tejinder Kaur and PW. 4 Ranjit Singh, DBBL gun was carried by Balbir Singh. He fired first shot at the deceased. The prosecution case further is that Tirath Singh tried to run away. He was chased and overpowered. He fell down. Then Balbir Singh handed over gun to Baldev Singh. Baldev Singh fired two shots at the deceased. No explanation has been given why Balbir Singh had handed over gun to Baldev Singh. According to PW. 3 Tejinder Kaur, Baldev Singh was already carrying kirpan. He was chased and overpowered. He fell down. Then Balbir Singh handed over gun to Baldev Singh. Baldev Singh fired two shots at the deceased. No explanation has been given why Balbir Singh had handed over gun to Baldev Singh. According to PW. 3 Tejinder Kaur, Baldev Singh was already carrying kirpan. Kirpan in fact was recovered from Baldev Singh, but the gun was recovered from Balbir Singh. It is not the case of the prosecution that Baldev Singh had thrown his kirpan or handed over his kirpan to any of the assailants before getting gun from Balbir Singh. 17. The prosecution has proved its case against appellant Balbir Singh conclusively. However, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against appellant Baldev Singh that he fired two shots at the deceased. Appellant Bachan Singh has died on 06.03.2008 during the pendency of the appeal, as is evident from his death certificate dated 24.04.2008 produced by learned counsel for the appellants. 18. Accordingly, CRA-D-681-DB of 2004 qua appellant Bachan Singh stands abated and the appeal qua appellant Balbir Singh is dismissed. CRA-D-760-DB of 2004 is allowed. The conviction and sentence of appellant Balbir Singh under Section 302/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act are upheld. Appellant Baldev Singh is acquitted of the charges framed against under Section 302 IPC and Section 29 of the Arms Act. The sentence of Balbir Singh was suspended vide order dated 15.09.2006. His bail bond and surety bond are cancelled. He is directed to surrender before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate to undergo remaining part of his sentence. The sentence of Baldev Singh was suspended vide order dated 20.03.2007. His bail bond and surety bond are discharged.