JAI PRATAP DUBEY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 28.2.2006, passed by Special Judge [Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act], Rewa, in Special Case No.33/2005, convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1000/-.

(2.) According to prosecution, on 20.7.2005, at about 10.00 a.m., when Chhotelal, the deceased, was putting soil on the embankment of his field, appellant, whose field was adjacent, reached there, abused him and asked why he was putting soil on his embankment. When he said that he was putting soil on his side, appellant assaulted him with Lathi. Deceased fell down in his field. His daughter-in-law, Chhotidevi, reached there and asked appellant not to beat his father-in-law, but after inflicting some more Lathi blows, appellant went away. Deceased alongwith his son Rambabu and wife Tijiyabai went to Police Station, Jawa, and lodged the first information report (Ex.P/14). Deceased was sent to Community Health Centre, Jawa, for treatment, but, on the same day, at about 7.30 O'clock in the evening, he died. After conducting inquest proceedings and recording the inquest memo (Ex.P/3), dead body of deceased was sent for postmortem examination. Dr.R.L. Singh (PW-12), Medical Officer of community Health Centre, Jawa, conducted the postmortem examination and vide his report Ex.P/13 found two bruise injuries on the back of the deceased. In the opinion of doctor deceased had died due to shock resulting from rupture of his spleen. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed and the case was committed for trial.

(3.) Trial court framed charges under Sections 294, 506B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Finding the evidence insufficient to bring home the charge under Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act trial Court acquitted the appellant of that charge, however, relying on the evidence of eyewitnesses Chhotidevi (PW-1), Shakuntala (PW-2), Rambabu Sonkar (PW-3), Tijiyabai (PW-5) and the evidence of first information report (Ex.P/14), recorded on the information given by the deceased, held the appellant guilty and convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, appellant has filed this appeal.