CF00000581S7 fe'sf^ IE THE HIGH COURT OF M.P.: s AT JABALF 133 Criminal Appeal No /1995 APPELLAIOT ^ ^D Ramprasad alias Gxhli, S/o i3~haduram Yadav, resident of Amoda,(aged 40 years)<Thana- O'anlcrir^ Distt. Bilaspur. •Versus- R3SPOKDEI.TT State of Madhya Pradesh, through S.0«, Janjgir, District -.Bilaspur. AFPEAL UNDER SECTIQNU74, CRININAL PROCEDURE CODE FROH'CONVIC'riON TO LIFE II-iPRBSONMEITT UKDER S3CTION 302 I.P.C. XE-HC-22 3]T^iqiI f?;!N'-3nt?r %'qR7^lS3 -T^ ^irai?p(, -STfrffTs, l^cirey p r.Sl^....l.ctZd^' sn^! ^siiwnfttt 'iRiqpTllPRff'qTS^'f ^;3?RIH3ii^t IViSSON BENCH: HON'BLEI )0 iSCtiSS. irasad @ Tihail Stafc of Madhva Pradesh Shri K.K.SIngh, teamed counse) Shri U.N.S.Deo, tearned indra Aarawai. learned Pane! Lawterfor the resoondent/State 'd 100, -J i/appeilant has jeferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure ipode questioning the iegality and correctness of the judgment of convj 1 27.01.95 passed by learned Addition^ 153/93 whereby the iearned- S^sion Judge after holding the accused/appellant guiitv for commissicjn of murder of ohe Ashok cc.nvicted for the appeilant. ional Public Prosecutor with Shri :tion and order of sentence dated iessions Judge, Sakti in S.T. No. him under Section 302 of the India accused/appeilant to undergo irnprisorjment for life. The brief facts of the prosecution cas^ c.m. P.VV.-1 Ramnath lodged First Infd station Janjgir to the effect that a d^ 1 Penal Code and sentenced the are that on 13.06.92 at about 4.15 ion Report Ex.P.-1 in the poilce y before thereto(!.e.on 12.06:92, / XI-HC-22 "Tn? •^l'41ci*i, ®fl!'M'ls,T^IRiy te--^4^J^; ^ ai^H^i fS?^ 311^5! »it^^fcT aiRRfiBCW^fe -2- c?ii'tsid14i^ ^T^ff ^ft^ <[^^.!< iTSIRPTSn^f th*t obk Friday) In the evening when he wasj Suraj Prasad came and informed th^ pond. On hearing this, he aiong wi' the spot carrying a iantern and saw Ashok and biood was oozing out| rsgistered the case'under Section occurrence after gtvinci notice .P-2 P-3 of dead body of Ashok and t( and plain soll from the place.of occi| broken teeth and one piece of bon^ piace of occurrence. The weap< possession from the accused/apt deceased were taken into possessi^ for post mortem examtnafton to| U.C.Sharma conducted the post mo| P-7. The identification parade of th< piace of occurrence was conductei| identification memo P-8. Site pian F( compietion of investigation, charge Magistrate FirsS Class, Janjgir whj Sessions Judge, Bilaspur from vi/iji Judge, JanjgiF i'eceived the case on| The prosecution in order to estaqi ^examined 16 witnesses. On i| accused/oppellant was aiso record^ |taking his dinner, his younger brother Ashok has been murdered near the :|i Suraj, Chetan & Laal Baba went to (hat there were injuries on the head of of it. Receiving the report, S.H.O. 32 of the iPC, left for the scene of ^) the panchas, prepared panchnama into possession blood stained soii jrrence. One cotton Paijama, the four. were taken into possession from the [>n of offence-teto' was taken into sl'ant under P-5. Ciothes of the |n under P-6. Body of Ashok was sent GovE HosDital. Janjgir where Dr. |tem and prepared post mortem report tcwei which was recovered from ihe by Naib Tahsiidar and prepared ':he -9 was prepared by the Patwari. After iheet was fiied in the Court of Judicial t> in turn committed the case to the the learned Additional Sessions ppe iransferfoTtria!. lish the charae agal ie other hand statement of the d. under Section 313 ofthe Ci-.P.C. in XI-HC-22 's^^vnvpf, tfTiwis, ra?iRfg;< CTt?iq:T <";?N'31lt?I 5?$°;^]fe; --^4-^°.^^ 3TK^?TmwrfOT -s- •qOTfepfH wraf'?-fS^ •rf5R<TC ^; 3SFTO 3Tit¥! R whioh he denied the prosecution 4vidence appearing against him ar stated that he has been faiseiy impli4ated In the crime. after hearina the arauments of t'he counsel for the accused/appellani bcused/appei'ant as mentloned in Learned Additionai Sessions Juds^ Additional Public Prosecutor and convicted and sentenced the al paragraph one ofthejudgment. We have heard Shri K.K. Singh, leai'l and Shri U.N.S.Deo with Shri Ravi? ped coynsei for the accused/'appeilanl Agrawa! on behaif of the State. Homicida! death of Ashok is not in difepute. As far as the involvement of accuseU/ concerned, Shri Singh, iearned couiji that the First Information Report was the name of the eye v/itness namelt P.W.-6 Bhagv/an Das has stated th^ disclosed about ths incident to anybf him. Therefor® the triaS Court evidence of P.W.-6 Bhaawan Das crime in question and the evidence| therefore the conviction is bad. ^i/appeiiant in.the crime In question is ^ lodged by P.VV.-1 Ramnath in which [{ Bhagvifan Das is not mentioned and [t except P.W.-7 Taantuni, he had not |3dy eise of witnessing of the 'crime -by wrongly piaced reliance on the |as there was no eye Vifitness of the 'of P.W.-6 does not inspire evidence On the other hand SVir. Agrawal, ledrned counse! for the State supported the iudgment of the trial Court.- XI-HC-22 sn^i^iT fe;!W3n^1 ^i:T^"^T?^[ -S^^l! > a..C|.:-^-l-^-l^ 3)1^1 TOireT flf%?i -I- qricRH tW?lf'q TS'St'{f^R ^siRrasii^ . ihaavi.'an Das informed hirn therefor] the eye witness in the FSR is of no ijsonsequence. P.W.-6 Bhagwan Das has categorically stated that on the {] in order to appreciate the argument ^dyanced by the learned counsel for ihe accused/appeitant, we have peru^ed the evidence on recoi'd. As far as the first argument is concsrned Ram| Nath has stated that he wes f^w~ informed by his younger'brother $uraj and he has pqt stated_ ti^at f^\< ^ non-mentioning ofi^hagwan Das, ^tefu! day he aiong vvith Ashok and Babu vvent towards the pond to atteifid the cail of nature. h'e and Ashok went t6 attend the call of the naturelnear the cana! v/hereas Babu Vi'ent near the culvert. After some time the tccused Tihali came neas' to him and after iooking at him he went Sov,'ardsi hand and he assaulted Ashok with th4 lathi. Beigg frightened by fhs act of the aceused he ran way and when h^ sound of second assauit. Thereafter] about the incident. !n the cross exarhination this witness has stated that except Taantuni he had not informedi stated that Bhagwan Das came and ir] Ashok wjth lathi and thereafter he alt>ng with Bhaawan Das went to take bath on the tank. Therefore the ^vidence of Bhagwan Das siands corroborated by P.W.-7 Taantuni an Ashok. He was carrying !athi in his reaehed riear the tree he heard the he went to TaantUni and'inforrnsd , anybody else. P.W.-7 Taantuni has iformed him that Tihals has assaulted the defenc®has not been abie to e'icit any cireumstance in th®cross ejcamination of Bhagwan Das that this witness in any way had strained relsl » there is no reason for this witness tol third v/itness Babu Bhai who accomp^nied the deceased and PM.-Q while joing to attend the call of nature ha^ the record it appears that this v/itnes^ has died. Moreover P.W.-5 Kumud iai, wife of the deceased has stated ions with the accused and therefore implicate him in this faise case. The not been examined because as pef Ehat two davs before the incident the Xi-HC-22 SIT^iqi; jG'l)di -^ii^i %'qRT^'f??T rsfsiraRTO, (yitepre, fai-ii'My ^.^M^^ <i3 3ii^?i'^giw:'Hfta -S- .1 accused came and demanded Rs. 2,POO/- which her husband refused to give on the ground that he had no rrjoney. At this the accused/appeiiant threatened and just after two days {he| incident happened. Thus, in-view of the above evidence we are of the cohsidered opinion that the findinas of the tna! Court convlcting the accused/|appel!ant in the crime in question, is based on the lega! evidence and ti^e same does. not suffer from. any iegality or infirmity. Learned coun^el for the accused/appe'lant also submitted that the aecused/appeilant ^ssauited with iathi on the head and therefore the offence against the ,acci|sed does not travel beyond 304-11 of IPC. . -I.WjfRS^ ^ ^lf.-fl^ tho 'P; !n order to appreciate the argument] appeilant, v/e have perused the post| Dr. U.C.Sharma who conducted th^ 13.06.92 he conducted the post mort^ that: . s) there was a iacerated wound sizeof6x1x1./2cm. ii) iacerated wound on the mandi lower teeth was broken iii) the !ower jaw was found fracturj iv) a Jacerated wound on the left si| v) one incised wound on the righ| V!) vii) the bone was fractured in the si frontal bone of the head was and the braln materiai was iace and there was contusion on ths advanced by th.e counsel for the Ui i4- -. monem nas statea tnat on :^m on the body of Ashok and'found jin the right. side of the head in ihe i^le region in the size of 5x2x5 cm., ^d at many places. itle in the slze Of 1x1/2 x1/2 cm. re eye ana Deiow ine rigm eye Ee of5x1x4cm ^ind broken in the size of 4x1/2x1cm folind sd right side ofthe neck and chest. XI-HC-22 3?A?l^ R:TW •311^1 ^?4RR"??f??T ~5^ •='-Si<ilCT4, «T'J";',S..'INCT-ay 9^ .(!.y...^..-..&(».....!l^ an^i ^iiWHta ^pfeqN'iTFRff 8 fe€t^RZR '¥3iRn3<RB The cause of death was si-bck iniunes. hemorrhaoe due to head 'he intention couid be gathered fronj the nature of the injuries, the piace where the injuries v/ere inflicted and t^e vreapon of offence. !f we io6k Into the nu.mber of injuries of bones ofth^ head, frontal bone ofthe head,'jaw, chin v/ere found fractured, eve.n te4th were broken and the brain was iacerated therefore the above injunesj to cause death and the intention of| Ashok by assauiting repeatediy by te( were sufficient in the or. rture was clear to'commit the murder of ^shok. Therefore we do not find any substance 'and the appeai being dev^id of ments is iiab3e to be dismissec anrf it is accordingiy dismissed. Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge the accused to cause the death or' 'hl on the vita! part of the organ-head Sd/- DHIRENDRA MISHRA Judge ...—....,.-..._.^^J._..