fc CF0000060994 IS 'EBB HISH QQVBS QS yt^SSX&VS.SB&SB. £S S&BSiSVB. CriiniBai Appeal fie<i ]'^,-l>j/199& Oivision &ench (, ii"»'itilj .'• e-».»..• APgEiaABE i>ra4^P S/o Kat.l.lal ^fesaa aged 21 ?®ar&"S/® Mahfca Kttai^ Mtaaa V-ksd. BistSv' Durg M«P»-. Veriws illl.iL, \.:'_.._ v-wyt^SBSBeSSESS '»*^a" iceac'^: ff.^^~w"^ '^ '^. %RXtGEfel<!. SBSESaa s , S'feate of Madhya Pradesb thEqagh r.S. afcai Bi.sfct» Baa?g M.&. •B7s,.a'McC?l6>F_'i;@ e®BBGE GKIHIHM. EB©CEBOSB -^7 'iSlf~l ••T^ .-i.A-.tl^-^Z Y? < -3=q'?;nq^Fq, s^IWS. 'fe~TOy WIIW^H_........(S^..^.:...^ '//3 4) ')£ 3T!^T3i] <?TW 311^1 g?tri3i"HitiT cfti^d<rETl 'iTP^ff ^ '^St' Ti^?SR 3I73??'TOro<:'Hl??I iferf-srfl'-.te? - it*L ^ G ?ffili ^! y^.^ ^ ' ^ ^! ff11^. ^=s l^ 7 ?s=l T'^ ^R. ^ ^ ? ^^ E 3 ?fc^ A ? ^ SHRI DHIRENDRA MiSHRA. JJ afls of Msdhva Prad< ^^nnr,jn^riT 'ih^fta? prf'^i^ii s^e '^(k-d a w '• Ms. Nirupama Bajpal, iearned cpunsei for the appeilant. ^hi-^ ? 1 M .iiS; pi&ri - l£aaE-n>^rl f"^rt^'A...' &.fi^f^<~A*G i.i^lfh <^hr; P^'^L^,^?*- oni! ^.r^.o.uso, ~ isgmsci '^s^-iVL' . MQVOCSIS \lviin csi ti'' r^svsn'ji' Agrawai, P.L. for thsState/respondent. ^Ki ? AL >J y UUI .^^ aiSS ^ Ul.i L.C.Bhad The accused,''appellant Pracle^p has preferred this appea! under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Crimin^l Procedure questionlng the iegallty and correctness of the judgment of c^nviction and order of sentence dated 29;03.1996 passed by learned FourtH Additionai Ssssions Judge, Durg in S.T. No. 131/95 whersby the learn^d Additional Sessions Judge after ,i!*.i t hoiding the accused/appellant guifry br the commission of offence under Section 302 of the 1PC fbr committin^ the murder bf Tek Singh sentenced 1 him to undergo imprisonment for iife pnd to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and^ * aiso convlcted and sentenced him |for commlfting the murder of'Ravi Prakash under Section 302 of th^ IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonmeht for life and to pay firje -of Rs. 25,000/- and in default of payment of fine to furthar undergo Ri for 5-5 years in each offence. [ift^^feq XI-HC-22 'Svf ^RTRp!, s>Til^j|i», T5I?rRTIP aiicRiqii f3^ra'3!I^ST '?qN?'a1%?r G.4..^.-.^ 'jwr 311^T?T(IIWgfef •i~} •SRIWW^-1 IS^. •? fe^t Tf^3R '?? 3Tf'?n 3T[e?i Case ofthe prosecution, in brief, istl report P-S at police station Uttai or| effsct that at about 9.00 p.m. h deceased), Tek Singh (since dece^sed) and Pradeep (accused), ali the four went tovi'ards the tube weil. Th^re they wsshed their mouth. and went to'ws.rds Pahdore Road for attencj i'eached Ti®arthe.banysn fe-ee, acci. on which Ravi Verma started cryini to rescue Ravi upon which accused| SingSi saici that he has been stsbbet and 'made him !ay on the ground. in| Vi'hich accussd Pradeep chased hi| lying by the side of the roao' in '4 oozing out of ths injuries. He rais^ came on the spot and in which Di| and Kant Sharan Verma were also Kumar took the injured persons oijs poiics station. Receiving this repori|, hat P.W.-2 Neelkanth Verma 'odced a 27.12.92 at about 10.00 p.m. to the e alon A/ith Kav kash (since ijng the cail of nature. When Ravi sed Pradeep caught him from behind At this he along with Tek Singh tried Pradeeo attacked Tek Sinah and Tek reg'stered the crime under Section died in unconscious coridltion and lospital, P.W.-17 Dr. V.S. Bas |Q7 of the !PC. Hcweyer, Ravi Prakash fTek Singh died In the hospitai. AS the ^xamined the injuries on the body of 3ingh was CDndycted by'P.W.-15 30. Dehati Merg intlmation P-1 /ac'^.n'sTtri, B with knife. He took Tek Singh aside She meantlme Ravl started runnins on T! and sttacked with knife. Ravi was nconscious condition and biood was itf screams on which 20-25 vil'agere ip Kumar Verma, Shiv Kumar Verma fhere. Thereafter Raiendra & Hemant bike for rsporting the matter i" the Ghanshyam Singh, Head Constabie Rsf-/i Prskssh snd Tsk Sincih. Th©dost mQrtsn'i or; th.s-bcsdv of Rsv! & Tak'1 '\^fi ^ : < ; ^p, 1 ^.^/f^.rf a' ~-*^,t 'i ^rfi . i S/t ^ •^tf 1 ? i>-£-r i & i i =^/" ^fS/lJ' L ; ) t V-J i^S/i i 1 ^F3 £ fa; ? '^/ ^/'^ lhjl ^ t^ . ; '''i Iri 17 J '^-1 3 ^*r i?^ Pr. Prabhat PsYidey on 28.12,92 an' post mortem report of Ravi and T^k Singh was prepared under P-29 & 'vas siven bv Hemant Kumar Verma. n^.^i/^ffi^s'ftisf (^J]s?jplf5 riot'ic?1 P~? fo ths psnchsis.. or'SDsrsd [^ ^Ra^ ':fi_wr'_'n •TSf^ffqRra, (STllu'ia. I^WA^ A^...^... snS?;^ ri^ 3:n^?r ^tfe'ff^T an^; ^aiwafts ^.L 'qWfeFfN'qpRJT •? IB^'rfsRSTC 3; aifigi? .3[i^! panchanama P-3 of the body of'Te| Singh and P-12 of the body of Rsvl Prakssh. The Snvestjgating Officsr a|3o took into possession b'ood stained sh'it, one Sandow Banyan, one | haif sweater, a cotton . iungi ana underwear of Tek Singh. One paif of V-type siippers were taken into possession from the piace of occ{jrrence under P-7 and one paii' of siippers of Ravi Verma, one shaw! pnd^blood stained and piain soii from the place of occurrence were iak^n into possession under P-8. Biood stained sot' and ptaln soil from the |!ace of occurrence of incident of Tek Singh and one piastic green colour ijnug (lota) were taken into possessjon under P-9. Site plan P-14 was prep^red by Lakhan Lai Banjai'e, Patwari. Accused Pradeep whije in poiicsj custody gave memorandum P-15 regarding the place where he kept) the weapon of ofl'ence-knlfe and in s pursuance of that, the knife was.rec^vered at the.lnstance ot' the accused under P-16. Clotbes of the accus^d were taken into possession under I ' . P-17 and the.bicycie of the accus^d was taken mto possession under P-20. Injury report P-21A pf Ravi arjd' P-22A of Tek Slngh were prepai'ed by Dr. V.S. Baghs!. The blood st^ined artlcles Vi/ere sent to Director, Forensic Science Lafcioratorif, Sagaj' from where report P-28 A, P-28 B, P-28 C and P-28 D were received.jAfter completion of the investigation, charge shest wss filed against the sjccused for the commission of offence under Section 302 of the 1PC in Sie Court'of Judlcial Maaistrate First Class, Durg who in turn committed ^he: case to the Sessions Judge, Durc from where the iesrned Fourth Adflitionai Sessions Judae receivsd the case on transfer for trial. i J— Xi-HC-22 "s^ ^(rai5izi, ®-ai-y'!s,P«ni-«y ....^^.S^.ns^J^ iK|S.<l ?5I EN?3?T^T S^^ilqi ^llea •3a^(?Riw:^tg —4— ^^?ei'cft;l 3JP^t ^ TS^ <^f$l< ^siRraaK^i Prosecution In order to estab'ish the t examined as many as seventeen *4 was a!so i'ecorded under Section 3' tl'i.e 'materia! appearing against him itl that the witnssses haye so deposed] and he is innocent ari'd has been falsi sharge against the accused/appeiiant Mtnesses. Statement of the accused 13 of the Cr.P.C. in whlch he denied the prosecutjon evidence and stafed against him on account of animosity ^ly implicated In the crime. Leamed Additional Sessions Judg4 Additional Public Prosecutor and convicted and ssntenced the at paragraph one ofthejudgment. We have. heard Ms. Nirupama accused/appeitant and Sh" U.N.S.Cj on behalf ofthfe State. after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the accused/ao^eiignt cused/aDpeliant as /^n^r ;n sajpai, leamea counse eo, iearned G,A. with Shi for the iavmara o HoiT'icidal deaths of Ravi Prakash not in dispute that the sccused ancj Ravi Prakash and Tek Singh were cdusin brothers iTek Singh are not in dispute. It is aiso the deceased persons narneiv jusin brother; As far as the involvement of the accil j the murder of Ravt Prakash & Tek Sij the accused/appeliant argued that F) j examination has stated that he was li weapon the accused atfacked the dj the incldent took place in the dark him (Neetkgnth Verma) to have w| ased/appeliant Pradeep in committlng ngh is concernsd, tearned counse' for '.W.-2 Neelkanth Verma in the cross hot abie to see that wlth whlch kind of sceased and she further argued ihat iighf therefore it was not possibie for |tnessed the sccused attacking the [•'il^^feq XI-HC-22 ~s^ •^M\"\^, 's^ira'TS, Ryi'yy.i aiRg'^il E<-ii<*>' 3?1^?T ^*iic^ ^^^ a..^.^...ig> MWI ^viwsws —5+ deceased with the said knife. Moredve Prakash ran awav and thereafter he about 40 steps away frorn the body it was nct posslbie for.Neeikanth Vel by accused pradeep. She furthec ar^ue knlfe P.W.-9 Jitendra Kumar Madharji of knife 1s 'aiso not proved. >r the prosecution case is that Ravi jwas attacked arid his bodyvvas found bf Tek Sihgh and'in such a dark nlaht 1'ma to witness the attack being made jued that even the recovesy wifness of la'has turned hostile and the reccven,' due On the other hand Shrl U.N.S.Det Agrawal, P.L. for the State supportecj in order to appreciate the argumerj i'espectlve parties we have scruti witnesses. P.W1-2 Neeikanth, as pes with accused Pradeep, deceased pi and a!S of them went toaether to mouth and thereafter they proceedes cs!! of nature. P.W.-2 in his evidenc. Koaa and aner covenna eertair aiong with Tek Singh sa*/ that accij whlch h®aiong v/ith Tek Sinah i.ntei ^W<i^?i ^.^-^t ~^ i^y.i ^f^tri-K ^ isf'dN s^^i ;, tearned G.A. with Shri'Ravindra the judement of the tria! Court. advanced bv the counsei for the nized the evldence of orbsecution the prosecution cass. He was along srsons Ravi Prskash and Tek Sinah t tybe well where they washed their towards Pahdore Road to attend the ^ has stated that he along with Ravi, Fek Slngh and Pradeep wenf to attei|)d the cal! of nature towards Pahdore tance'Ravi Prak« 'aiseci cnes. sed pradeep had caught Ravi upon 1-1 ijvened ^whereupon accused Pradsep pu.shed them and attacked. Tek Sin^h and thereafter he ran towards the ;ide where Ravi Prakash ran. He jenquired ft'om Tek singh that.wrtat i happsned. At thjs Tek Singh repliec| that Pradeep a'itacked him v»'ith the knife on which he took Tek Singh onlthe side ofthe road and made him to sie on the ground and started shoutjng "run, run" on which the viiiagers > [^3 ^s^ XI-HC-22 ^^ '3^? 'sfwi'if, 9-aww, raeii-yy .:.5i^...~lsi fM. "^ j2W^- SI'^H'^i 'R'IRTSIB?! ^-l-ilq7 W^ siK% ?:Egiw¥!wg -<0 "wRn'qre'st-'T ~^ SfRP? 3?Iq?i' came and fhereafter they saw that away from Tek Singh. Btood vva^ Prakash and thereafter the viilag^ scooter to the Doiice station distance of40 s'sps oozing out of ths injuries of Ravi |'s took Tek Singh. and Ravi on the ladged the report P-6. in ule cross examination DV ivir. LJI Prsdeep caught Ravi, he along distancs of 1-1 14 feet Ravi raised t| Thereafter Ravi ran away from th^i Ravi and he even could not see wit} Tek Sinsh but he was abie to see aiso did not saw the knife in ihe ha| that Tek Singh told him that Prade^: this pniy he is stating thst Pradeep Iji Panna Lai has siated that on heasi spot and on en.quiry from P.W.-2 Nj Pt-adeep has attacked Tek Slngh ^ near Tek Singh snd on enquir/ nas'rsted that Pradeep has attacke^! towards Ravi vvho was iying on th^ there was dark. Simiiar is the evid^ Tek Singh dlsclosed that Pradeeo was iying ahead in unconscious cosj] injuries on the body of Ravi & Tek ^i Thanu Ram. P.W.-7 Ashok Kumar B thaf accused pradeep has attackeel Ghanshyam Singh, Head Constab!4 jurandar he statecl that when accused h Tek Sinah and Ravi were at a |ie cries but he cid not speak anything. fre and he did noi saw wfo attacksd h which weaoon the accused attacksd ithat accused afiacked Tek Slngh, He |id of accused Pradeep. Again he said Ip has'attacked him with the knife. On sas attacked him with the khife. P.VV.-4 Eng the screams they reached on the ^eikanth he informed that the accused |nd Ravi with the knife. They reached Irom Tek Sinah v/ho was conscious, him with a knife and' then ihey went iround but he was unconscious and ics of P.W.-5 Kant Sharan Verns fhat attacked him with the knife and Fiavi idition snd biood was oozing out of ths lingh. SimiSar is the svidence of P.W.-6 las also stated tha{ Tek Sinah narrated him and Ravi.with ths knife. P.W.-12 i?s cf^tsj^ ths;f :FiH fhs ri^fft f^f iHi'^id^H' *»f^'^i^\H ^ii^tL -^i? ^Il^ ^riC^ fc-& Ve St t^-i-wi.^a i an pfiairaq XI-HC-22 "3^ ''-liwpt, .C.IA.^^.^sf^ IR^^iT R:'W3ns!CT ^*n^-'s?i^T SIR^tI^iRR'HRa -I 'wwran'wraf •4Ti'sr •(fSFerc i? Slfigq 31Rg i duiy ai puiice stauyn Utlai, Ntite!kt<!!th terefore from the above evidence it is ~at aDou'i 'iuX'u p.m. wnen ne was o; came and iodged the report P-6. T! established that at the time of ci sccused Pradeep, eyewitness Nee| were together. They vi'ent togetheii v/ent to attsnd the cail of nature and they couid'sit to attend ihe call of n| ;SIi! scaiiisi, eassci i eK ymsn anct KSV! h 's. that P.W.-2 Neelkanth has stated see that with which kind of we; deceased Tek Sinsh was consc'o! attacked him wtth the knlfe and ihe ;f! ]?^ri P?^fi?s;'an ?;"f?;ft<'jsd h^ it wi^^*^3-^'^\^ 1 ? £x<Srfii S^ Js*/Eh-f ^^4.LtlluTi\+w:-^ ^ i^! ks.and he clearlv stated that accused same statementwas 'nade by hlm to other witnesses whose name has b^en menSioned eari'er. Thus, deceassd Tek Sing'n' mad®oral dying declai voiuntary and immediate and before a false statement implicating the ac| The fsct that all the four persons witness Neeikanth were togethei) dsceased oersons were seen s-livi and the incident of murders of proximate and there is no evidencj thev stsrted to attend the cali of anvbodv elss came there. P.W. accused attacked Tek Sinsh and Tl accused attacked him 'A'ith the kr1 attacked with fhe knlfe. Now;comink as per NeelkanSh, this witness in ^ tion before these witnesses.which v'as t whom there was no occssion to make sused in the crime in ausstion. ^ <& to the tube wel! and from ihere they after covering csrtain distance, before ature, the incident took piacs. !t is true iat due to darkness he was not able fo the two deceased, accused and eye has not been disputed. "^^to The with the accused and the eye witness Ravi Prakash and Tek Sinah was so that In bsfween the short time vmen tature and the insident happened and 1-2 Neeikanth has c'eariy stated shat [ek Singh made a dv'ng declaration that life. This estabiishes ihat the accused to the attack ypon Ravi is'coRcerned, Se first instance stated that the accused [^ ^s^ Xi-HC-22 -ys:. •^n^Rpi, s»tii«ire',TOCTTay ........^^.£^.0^& S'icSI'SSI 3?i^?i 5irRw'HI5?[ ^fi^. '?^I^? ^f^^ wtt-!^ :WRn '?1s^"ipReiT ^? 31RF; ;S!KH ~ • -%. 12. cauaht Ravi on Vi'hich he ralsed t| intervened and separated Pr^ attscked Tek Singh with a knifej Singh and Neeikanth.he chased) 'A'as founc! sustainlng injuries. Pradeep was the author of the s1 Thus, based on the dying declai cnme bv P.W.-2 'Neeikanth it is s the author of the injuries •nfSicti Verma. This fact stands further c PW.-5 Neeikamh lnd"ed the rei V-~^. ]'^W^'iT-.'^S.S',»': ^ ^Vwy^'V^ S.E ji^ ; ^; which hc h^s c sssi'lv msntlonsci -w^^i Tek Singh with knife. Even thi •A'hich have been proved by P.1 Prabhat Pandey as vsrious cul!^ 'fccdy of Ravl and Tek Sinah whid Th©rsfc?ysthis msd c^i ©vd^ncs founci on the bodv of Ravi and T4 'Even thouQh P.W.-8 Jitendra supported the prosecutiQn cas^ 'nes steted that on 31.12.92 accil' information P-15 thst he has kel one Ra.mdin Verma and he can of that took him to the place conceaied snd. he oroducsd W screams whereupon he and Tek Singh from Ravi whereupon Pradeep and after getting tiimself free from Tek Rav' Prakash and bedy of Ravi Prskash 'herefore it is established that accused ;d wounds infiicted uoon Ravi. tetion of Tek Singh and witnessing cf the ^tabllshed that the accused Pradeep v/as id on the bodv of Tek Sinah ana Ravi biTobcr^tsd fov ths fsct that wlthin no tin^s bort P~©in th©oolics st^tlon'Uttai •snd In |»h?sf •%^nu!=;!sn pr^^iSisn ??t"sr>:;r£s^ Nt?s'^ .^n^ •!iu<3» fa^'^'It^- ^"^^r ^- '^,; i- t h^."-W.~\^ ~^/ ^' ^Litikt^Tll^ a'-^'fuf^u^ t ^.tA 'fc' ; <irit L r^/.l ^^•o ^*^T^/^ y^.^E?11^ ^v^ ^h'^^^.f^y^ -c'L—b.:I"^/s-f'^ iHjury rspons ^na posT mor^sm rsporx ihf.1-i.7 n' M K Rc:-i~ni -snri PW-I^ ~!!- s «' '^"s, y , s^j. i.j^gyiie;; su su r' ,.'.?"." i '.^ —/;. nd inciss1^ wounas we9fs TOU'^CI on ^n^ ih S.l'Q CdUS^d b11?' ShSfD Snd h3;*d. W€1'3DOH is •suQcestive that the inluries which were Ik Sinah were of knife. Kumar has tumed hostils and has net but P.W.-14 B.S.Thakur, PoSlce Officer |sed Pradeep whi!e in poiice custodY gave 3t the knife in'his vitiage in the house of set recovered ths same and in Dursusnce If/here the weapon of offence-kn'fe was same after bringing the same from the [1[ftS^R3?l F5?'=qra"Pl, -3^TT"!S, TqwRiy 3?R?f^I T?s[|3? 31S5I ^i^i!^ ~eT??T ifr "1 .^^Sft ..........Q^GL..^ &. Jfifl^" -k" siTOd^i'gT'gt^ -^-^ 'qiFfeWT ti'flR?!' •?feerTH^R •¥aRn3iK?f house of Ramdin Verma and the s^me was taken into custody under P-18 which was stained with blood and 4'otted biood.vras present on the kn'fe. As per the report of Forensic Sci^ice Laboraton/ P-23 D, the knife and ciothes of the accused were found! stained with blood. Therefore in the cireumstances, recovery of knife st^ined with biood at the instance of the accused further corroborates ihe brosecution cs.se. P.W.-3 Jeevan Lai who 1s none eise than the uncle of aecused Pradeep and fsther of Ravi Prakash Verma has stated that in tfie year 1985, a case regarding theft of a golden neckiace of his wife was pjending in the Court and some summon was Issued In that cgse and accus^d Pradeep csme with fhat summon to thesr house. At.thls they repiied fiat it is a Govsrnment summon snd therefore some Government pers|?n ought to have brought the same, upon v/hich accused Pradeep thr4atened him saying that he has been Insui'ted and he will sse them and ths said aitercation took between '?avi Prakash and Pradeep and he thr4atened Ravl. Therefore from this fact and also the fact that there was ^ pond of the joint family in the villsge which was glven by the faml'y fo some smount of Rs. 25,000/- v^hich was paid by the Contractor to Yashwant, brother of the accusel imong the co-shsrers, on that accc; was a mofive behind the commissid in the'resuit the cuniuiative effecti and it is established that the acdused question in which the murder of R^ foregoing ressons we do not find 4 r-.if^ ^|!iSftJ~ci3"y f^r i y^vi i'':'¥irh/in AhA finrl'' ri3 -" • --/ *" -' • " - • - - -- -^—•- - - - - .-.-—-- -^,, \ fishing contract and in that contract y and the same was not distributec untthere was a dispute sr th^ fln?ns Sr^.n 3v<E L! of ali the above factors is suggestive /as the author of the crime i" /i & Tek Sinah was committed. For the iy substance in this appeal as there is rvf fh^ friffil Cou;4 [T^^f©^ rfr;7T.vp^E^W»^.^^.!.J!^(7^vLp';A4'^*B^' 'dsr lsa3iRiud-a*luuu- aSpnf •vaHsm vaaNsama -/PS ?q QI giq'eii si suies eqi pue s}i.iaui aBpnr ooavHa'o'n -/PS pssssiusip Aqsjsu si u pue pssstiussp o DioAsp si lesdde sqi 'iinssj sqi ui ayi£)i6:Bes. M&fe?. )2i2t fr U»t!ttiaUiBBiife -°)- BSiB: iftflaa itett£ ...........attia -^^rv-^^"y--w ife&h'lAJ&lK 1 nai»iblh>» ttalteaik^ ! .Si ^fiIKy.'glt&^S.'!2^!bU2±E£ ZZ-3H-IX