Ludhiana: Nearly 13 years after a farmer was shot at while travelling in a car with a friend, a local court has sentenced a man to five years’ rigorous imprisonment for attempt to murder, holding that even though the prosecution could not establish that he had fired the shots, his presence with the armed assailants and participation in the attack proved common intention.Additional sessions judge Dr Gurpreet Kaur convicted Buta Khan of Takhar Khurd village under Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC. The court also rejected his plea for leniency, citing the gravity of the offence.The case dates back to Feb 11, 2013, when complainant Kulwant Singh, a farmer from Dehlon village, was travelling towards Ludhiana in his Maruti car with his friend Jatinder Singh. Around 4.30pm, when they reached Sangowal village, a car allegedly chased them and its occupants opened fire. One of the bullets pierced the rear seat and hit Kulwant in the back.Kulwant was admitted to Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, where he was initially declared unfit to make a statement. His statement was recorded the next day after doctors declared him fit to depose.In his complaint, Kulwant linked the attack to a land dispute. He alleged that Harpreet Singh of Tussay village had been demanding money from him in connection with his one-acre land and that he had refused to pay. He accused Harpreet and his associates of chasing him and opening fire.During the investigation, Harpreet was declared innocent. Buta was arrested on Dec 2, 2013, while two other accused, Uma Shankar and Bhim Singh alias Mattu, were not arrested. Proceedings against the two are still pending, according to the judgment.During the trial, Kulwant identified Buta as one of the occupants of the car from which the shots were fired. Jatinder, however, turned hostile and did not identify the assailants.The defence argued that Buta had neither fired at Kulwant nor had any previous enmity with him. It also pointed out that no test identification parade had been conducted and no weapon was recovered from him.The court, however, held that the complainant’s identification of Buta and his presence in the car with the armed assailants established his participation in the crime and common intention.It noted that although the prosecution had failed to prove the bullet injuries through the testimony of the treating doctors, who were not examined during the trial, the charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC stood established.Rejecting the convict’s plea for leniency, the court observed: “Keeping in view the gravity of the offence, this court is of the considered view that the convict does not deserve any leniency.”—shariq.majeed@timesgroup.com—shariq.majeed@timesgroup.com
