STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. SURPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State is in appeal by special leave against an order of acquittal dated 13th November, 1991 recorded by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 513 of 1987.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, on 16th January, 1986 in village Aabgari, Police Station Udaigarh, Distt. Jhabua, the respondent allegedly fired a shot from his licensed gun hitting deceased Gulab Singh, who succumbed to injuries at the spot. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place at about 6 P.M. and was witnessed by Soni Bai, PW-1 widow of the deceased and his son Bhanwar Singh, PW-2; as also by Bhuru, PW-3 whose house is located in front of the house of the deceased. The first information report was lodged by Soni Bai, PW-1 at Police Station Udaigarh next day, i.e. on 17th January, 1986 at 13. 15 hours. At that time she was accompanied by Ter Singh, Watchman PW-7. After recording the first information report, investigation was taken in hand by Shri T. S. Thakur, S.H.O. PW-5. He prepared the injury statement at the spot and after spot inspection and verification sent the body for post mortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Kishore Kumar Mirkar - PW-6 on 18th January, 1986. The respondent was arrested and on his disclosure statement. Ex.P-7, his loaded gun was seized vide seizure memo, Ex. P-8. According to the post mortem report, the deceased died as a result of shock and haemorrhage caused by injuries 5, 7 and 8, as mentioned in that report. The post mortem report also records that those injuries had been caused by gun shot and during the post mortem examination a bullet was recovered from the chest cavity of the deceased. That bullet was preserved, sealed and forwarded to S.H.O. Udaigarh. After completion of the investigation, the respondent was sent up for trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 18th August, 1987 convicted the respondent for an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. The co-accused of the respondent, Alap Singh was, however, given benefit of doubt and acquitted. The respondent put in issue his conviction and sentence before the High Court and as already noticed, the High Court vide judgment dated 13th November, 1991 allowed his appeal and set aside his conviction and sentence. Hence this appeal by special leave by the State.

(3.) We have perused the record and heard learned counsel for the parties.