MAHARAJ HAIDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The time was 8:30 PM and the date was March 13, 1994. The place was the weekly Sunday Bazaar at Nangal Dairy. The appellant Maharaj Haider, one Mohd.Ismile, one Mumtaz Begum and one Mehrunisa were sucked into an altercation with the deceased, origin whereof was a week prior when Mumtaz Begum and Mehrunisa purchased a pair of chappals each from Phool Kumar PW -14 and returning to Phool Kumar's place of business at the weekly bazaar to return the chappals informing that they were substandard. Mohan Pal PW -2 vending his wares next to Phool Kumar detecting that the chappals had been used, and hence prompting Phool Kumar not to replace the chappals, resulting in a remonstration between the two ladies, Phool Kumar and Mohan Pal, attracting appellant Maharaj Haider and Mohd.Ismile to the vending site of Phool Kumar, because the two resided nearby in a jhuggi. The two requested Phool Kumar and Mohan Pal to replace the chappals sold by Phool Kumar to Mumtaz Begum and Mehrunisa and the two gentlemen refusing. The deceased Vimal Kumar, brother of Mohan Pal, who also used to vend wares at the weekly market intervened. The remonstration turned sour. There was jostling. Vimal Kumar picked up a 'thapi : a wooden bat shaped object' to facilitate washing of clothes, and hit Maharaj Haider on the head, who seething in anger ran to his jhuggi nearby and returned with a meat chopping knife to inflict one solitary blow on Vimal, which unfortunately pierced the heart of Vimal causing his death.

(2.) These undisputed facts have emerged through the testimony of Subhash Chandra PW -1, Mohan Pal PW -2, Ram Kishan PW -4, Yashpal PW -5 and Phool Kumar PW -14.

(3.) We have been taken through the testimony of the five eye witnesses who saw the incident and regarding their presence being natural, learned counsel for the appellant has nothing to argue, because each one of them used to vend wares at the weekly bazaar. With the usual variations, which are expected when five people give account of the same incident, nothing emerges to discredit the testimony of any of the five eye witnesses.