OM PARKASH @ RAM KIRPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OM Prakash, the appellant stands convicted under Sections 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) by the impugned judgment dated 30th May, 1998 arising out of FIR No.217/1991, police station Dabri. By order on sentence dated 30th May, 1998, the appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/ - for the offence under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 15 days. For the offence under Section 324 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for one year. The sentences were to run concurrently and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Section 428 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code, for short). Baijnath was also tried along with the appellant but he has been acquitted by the impugned judgment. State has not preferred any appeal against his acquittal and, therefore, we are only concerned with the order of conviction and sentence of Om Prakash.

(2.) HOMICIDAL death of Mithu Rai in the intervening night of 11th and 12th July, 1991 stands established and proved beyond doubt in terms of testimony of Dr. Umed Singh (PW -7), who had proved the MLC of Mithu Rai Ex. PW7/A prepared by Dr. Chaman. Dr. Chaman had left service of DDU Hospital and his whereabouts were not known. PW -7 has identified the signature and handwriting of Dr. Chaman and has deposed that the MLC was prepared on 12th July, 1991 at 4.45 a.m. The said MLC, marked Ex.PW7/A, records that Mithu Rai was brought dead in the hospital at 4.45 a.m. on 12th July, 1991. However, the MLC of Mithu Rai is infact marked Ex.PW -15/E. He was not breathing. The pulse was not palpable and the heart beat was not audible. The pupils were fixed and dilated. As many as 5 injuries were noticed on local external examination. PW -7 has also deposed that Jawahar, who had appeared as PW -11, was also medically examined by Dr. Ronu vide MLC, Ex. PW7/B. Jawahar was brought to the hospital on 12th July, 1991 at 4.45 a.m. with alleged history of assault and was discharged after treatment. He had a clean lacerated wound (CLW) on the right arm and elbow. The said injury, as recorded, was caused by a sharp weapon and was simple in nature, though, PW -7 in his court deposition had opined that this injury could have been caused by a blunt object, as a sharp weapon when used, causes clean incised wound.

(3.) PW -16 has deposed that injuries were ante mortem. Injury Nos. 2 and 7 were caused by a blunt object, but all other injuries were caused by a sharp weapon. Injury Nos.3, 4 and 11 were individually sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. Five wounds described at Sr. No.11 were in chest and cavity deep. One of them had cut the diaphragm, and the stomach. The depth of the said injury was 12 cm. The remaining four had cut the left lung, which had partially collapsed. Injury No.4 after cutting the coastal margins had touched the liver. The total length of the cut on the liver surface was 3 cm and was 5 cm deep from the body surface. Injury No.3 had entered the right chest cavity and continued downwards over the diaphragm and liver. The total depth of this injury was 6 cm from the body surface. Subsequently, the weapon of offence i.e. the knife, sketch of which was marked Ex.PW3/B, was shown to PW -16 and he has deposed that all injuries except injury Nos.2 and 7 were possible from the said knife. He has stated that no blood was visible on the knife. He proved the post mortem report marked Ex.PW16/A, signed by him along with inquest papers etc.