HALLU AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EIGHTEEN persons were put up for trial before the First Additional Sessions Judge, Durg (M.P.) for offences arising out of the murder of two persons Jagdeo and Padum. The learned Judge acquitted them of all the charges but that order was partly set aside by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Which confirmed the acquittal of eight persons and convicted the remaining ten Under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on the afternoon of May 9, 1966, a group of about 18 persons including the Appellants dragged Jagdeo and Padum from their houses and attacked them with lathis, spears and axes. In 1965 Jagdeo and Padum were prosecuted along with two others for committing the murder of one Daulatram, the Sarpanch of the village. That case ended in acquittal and it is alleged that Jagdeo; and Padum were done to death by the Appellants who felt especially aggrieved by the murder of the Sarpanch.

(3.) APPLYING these broad principles the Sessions Court rejected the evidence of the eye -witnesses and acquitted the accused. In doing this the Court was influenced by these circumstances: (1) There were material discrepancies as regards the place where Jagdeo was assaulted. The police had taken scratching from the walls of Jagdeo's house but did not send them to the Chemical Analyser for ascertaining whether they bore stains of blood; (2) The widows of Jagdeo and Padum had stated that the two men were attacked with spears and axes but according to the medical evidence there were neither incised nor punctured wounds on the dead bodies; (3) As many as three different reports were given to the Police station on the morning of the day following the day of the incident but the names of the Appellants were not mentioned in any one of them; (4) In one of those reports the incident was stated to have happened at night whereas the case of the prosecution is that the incident happened in broad day light at about 1 p. m. and (5) There was no reliable evidence showing that the accused had sufficient motive to commit the murder.