POSHRAM PATEL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Poshram Patel has been convicted under Sections 307 and 354, IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and two years respectively.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for both the sides and after carefully considering the evidence on record, this Court is of the opinion that the conviction of the appellant for the aforesaid offences is unassailable. Ku. Janki Jangade (P. W. 1) is a school teacher and aged about 24 years. She has deposed that on 7-10-1996 at 10. 00 A. M. she was going to the school in village Bhanetara. She was walking and when she reached between village Amoda and Hasaud she saw accused Poshram Patel emerging from a paddy field. He caught hold of her hand and started dragging her towards the field. He pressed her breast and wanted to commit rape on her. She shouted 'bachao Bachao'. Thereupon the accused dealt a 'hathaura' (Hammer) blow on her head. The injury on the head started bleeding profusely. On hearing her noise a lady known as Kartikmati came there and took her to some distance. She called Arvind (P. W. 2) and Dojram (P. W. 3 ). They took her to Malkharoda Police Station. She lodged the report (Ex. P-1 ). She was then sent for medical examination. Her dying declaration was recorded by a Magistrate when she was in the hospital. Arvind (P. W. 2) and Dojram (P. W. 3) have deposed that they were told by Janaki (P. W. 1) that accused Poshram tried to outrage her modesty and assaulted her with a hammer. These two witnesses have tried to make themselves as eye witnesses to the incident, but it is clear from the evidence of Janaki (P. W. 1) that they reached near the place of incident after the assault.

(3.) DR. R. S. Mishra (P. W. 7) has deposed that he had examined Janaki (P. W. 1) on 7-10-1996 and found a lacerated wound 6 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm bone deep on her right parietal region. It was caused by a hard and blunt object. It was a grievous injury. The brain matter was visible from the injury. His report is Ex. P-8. There was fracture of the parietal bone. Dr. S. Chatterji (P. W. 6) has deposed that on 9-10-1996 he had taken X-ray of the skull of Janaki (P. W. 1) and found fracture of the right parietal bone. His report is Ex. P-7 and X-ray plate is Ex. P-7-A. From the evidence discussed above, it is found that the testimony of Janaki (P. W. 1) finds sufficient corroboration from the prompt FIR (Ex. P-1) and the medical evidence. It is established that the accused outraged the modesty of Janaki (P. W. 1) and when she resisted and shouted the accused dealt a hammer blow on her head causing fracture of the parietal bone from which the brain matter was visible. The conviction of the appellant under Sections 354 and 307, IPC is well merited.