Case: Daryao Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

skin looses coherence, the superficial layers peel off easily and blisters are formed. it is, therefore, not suprising that owning to the formation of gases the penis and the scrotum were swollen and there was the presence of maggots. 10. Before we answer the contention it is essential to notice a few facts. The evidence of PWs 1,3 and 4 is that the incident occurred in the field of the deceased. This fact is corroborated of PW--5 Motilal and PW 6--Parbatsingh. The find of blood on the grass blades and on the earth attached under the seizure memo Exh. p-8 confirms their testimony. The evidence of these witnesses further shows that the injured was taken in a cart to the village and from there to the Bhakheda police station. this is further established by PW 10 who has deposed that the vitim was brought in a cart to the village. the circle Inspector PW 12 also deposes that the corpse was brought to the police station and from there it was sent to the hospital for post mortem examination which was undertaken on 27th September, 1970 at 7.00 a.m. This evidence establishes the chain of events showing the movement of the dead body and rules out of the theory that death had taken place many days before 25th September, 1970, a theory not put to the witnesses in cross-examination. The direct testimony, therefore, does not support the theory urged on behalf of the appellant. 11. Counsel for the appellant, however, emphasised that the statement of PW 2 in cross-examination clearly established the existence of blisters, an objective fact, which clearly supports the defense theory that death had taken place 14 to 20 days prior to the date on which the post-mortem examination was held and thereby disprove the prosecution version that the victim of assault died on the evening of 25th September, 1970. It is interesting to note that table on which the learned counsel for the appellant relies is omitted from the 19th and 20th edition of the book. But that apart at pages 128-129 of the bok (Twentieth Edition) it is stated as under : "From twelve to eighteen hours after death in summer the green coloration spreads over the entire abdomen and the external genitals...............Side by side with the appearance of the greenish patch on the abodomen the body begins to emit a nauseating and unpleasant smell owing to gradual develoment of the gases of decomposition, some of which are sulphuretted hydrogen, marsh gas, carbon dioxide, ammonia and phosphoretted hydrogen. From twelve to eighteen hours after death in summer these gases collect in the intestine, consequently abdomen swells up. The sphincters relax, and the urine and faeces may escape. From eighteen to thirty-six or forty-eight hours after death the gases collect in the tissues, cavities and hollow viscera under considerable pressure with the result that the features become bloated and distored, the eyes are forcedout of their sockets, the tongue is protruded between the teeth, and the lips become swollen and everted. A frothy, reddish fluid or mucus is forced from the mouth and nostrils. Ultimately the features become obilterated and unrecognizable. The abdomen becomes greately distended; hence on opening the cavity the gas escapes with a loud explosive noise. Owing to the pressure of the gases the stomach contents are forced into the mouth the larynx and are seen running out of the mouth and nostrils. The breast of female bodies are greatly distended. The penis and scrotum become enormously swollen. The cellular tissues are inflated throughout, so that the shole body appears stouter and older than it actually is. These gases from blisters under the skin containing a reddish coloured fluid on the various parts of the body. When these bursts, the cuticle being softened peels of easily. These are characterised by absence of vital reaction. It will thus be seen that blisters appear after the process of decomposition sets in whithin eighteen to fotry eight hours. It shows that the existence of blisters does not mean that death had taken place 14 to 20 days ago. That is why PW 2 is cautious to use the pharseology the duration of the injury since death could be 14 to 20 days also. Having regard to the nature of the direct testimony to which we have adverted earlier andthe passage reproduced above, we find it difficult to accept the belated submissions of the learnd counsel for the appellant that the opinion of the medical expert PW 2 destroys the version of the prosecution witnesses, particularly PWs 1,3,4 and 10, that the deceased suffered a fatal wound on the evening of 25th September, 1970 to which he succumbed on that very day. We, therefore, reject this submission. 12. It was lastly submitted that the evidence of the radiologist. Keshav Shanker Varang, DW 3 goes to show that the appellant was a disabled person and it was not possible for him to cause an injury so serious as to cut the leg in two parts. In this connection, our attention was drawn to paragraph 7 of his deposition, wherein he has stated that looking to the fracture of the appellants leg and his chest condition he was a disabled person who could not run fast or walk quickly and, therefore, argued counsel, he could weild the sword with such ferocity as to cut the leg in to parts. In cross-examination he has admitted that he had not examined the muscle power the appellant. He conceded that the elbow was free and, therefore, he could use the weapon but not with great force. The High Court has considered this submission in paragraph 8 of its judgment and has rejected it. We do not think that having regard to the fact that the appellant alone was weilding the sword, it is to rely on this opinion evidence in preference to the direct evidence of three witnesses. High Court has rigtly rejected this submission and we need not dilate on it.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 0

Explanation:
0[ds]11. Counsel for the appellant, however, emphasised that the statement of PW 2 in cross-examination clearly established the existence of blisters, an objective fact, which clearly supports the defense theory that death had taken place 14 to 20 days prior to the date on which the post-mortem examination was held and thereby disprove the prosecution version that the victim of assault died on the evening of 25th September, 1970.It was lastly submitted that the evidence of the radiologist. Keshav Shanker Varang, DW 3 goes to show that the appellant was a disabled person and it was not possible for him to cause an injury so serious as to cut the leg in two parts. In this connection, our attention was drawn to paragraph 7 of his deposition, wherein he has stated that looking to the fracture of the appellants leg and his chest condition he was a disabled person who could not run fast or walk quickly and, therefore, argued counsel, he could weild the sword with such ferocity as to cut the leg in to parts. In cross-examination he has admitted that he had not examined the muscle power the appellant. He conceded that the elbow was free and, therefore, he could use the weapon but not with great force. The High Court has considered this submission in paragraph 8 of its judgment and has rejected it. We do not think that having regard to the fact that the appellant alone was weilding the sword, it is to rely on this opinion evidence in preference to the direct evidence of three witnesses. High Court has rigtly rejected this submission and we need not dilate on it.