BHOJ RAM RAWAT Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant stands convicted for committing murder of deceased Ramnath at about 2-30 p.m. on 15-09-2002.

(2.) The prosecution case as projected in the FIR and other material presented by the prosecution is that appellant Bhojram had obtained lease of land belonging to one Nandlal whereas some other lands of Nandlal were also leased out by him to witness Lalsai. On the date of incident, an altercation took place between the appellant and Lalsai where the appellant was asking from Lalsai as to the reason why he has obtained land on lease from Nandlal. It is said, the appellant slapped Lalsai and thereafter, the appellant was dragged by Lalsai and deceased towards the house of one Mannu and severely assaulted him by means of hands, fists and wooden plank. At this point of time, appellant's wife and his younger daughter Savitri (PW-8) wanted to rescue him but could not enter the house of Mannu because the door was closed. As soon as the appellant was released by Lalsai and the deceased, he rushed towards his house, came back with piped knife (Gupti) and first met Ramnath, therefore, he inflicted two successive abdomen blows on the person of Ramnath. The deceased was taken to the P.H.C., Lailunga, however, he succumbed to the injuries during treatment within a short time of his admission in the hospital.

(3.) The FIR (Ex P-1) was lodged by Mannulal at 16-30 hours on 15-09-2002 itself. Autopsy was conducted by Dr. S. Upadhyaya (PW-14) who submitted his report (Ex. P-31) finding two punctured wounds; first, over right lateral part of chest and the second over iliac fossa. Dr. Upadhyaya opined that the cause of death is syncope due to excessive internal and external hemorrhage due to rupture of spleen. As the case of prosecution was supported with ocular evidence, the charge sheet was filed against the appellant for committing murder of deceased Ramnath. The appellant was also charged for committing offence punishable under Sec. 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. However, at the end of trial, the appellant has been convicted only for committing offence under Sec. 302 of the IPC.