NIRANJAN SINGH LODHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has called in question judgment and sentence dated 30.07.2012 passed in Special Case No. 80/2008 (State of Madhya Pradesh vs Niranjan Singh Lodhi and others) by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Raisen (M.P.).

(2.) Prosecution story in brief is that there was civil dispute between complainant and accused persons. S.D.O. Begumganj has passed an order in favour of Ramko Bai on 29.04.2008. Despite order of S.D.O., accused persons namely Charan Singh Lodhi, Niranjan Singh Lodhi, Narendra Singh Lodhi and Omwati were not ready to leave possession of the disputed land. Over the dispute, on 08.07.2008, accused persons killed one Gudda @ Sumer Singh, who was son of Ramko Bai. Charan Singh is said to have assaulted the deceased on his head with a stick, due to which he fell inverse on the ground (upside down) and Niranjan Singh Lodhi sat on the back of deceased and repeatedly assaulted him on his back with long knife. Deceased died on spot. Thereafter, offences under Section 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act of 1989') and Section 25 of Arms Act was registered against accused persons. In trial appellant-Niranjan Singh Lodhi was held guilty for commision of offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 3(2) (v) of the Act of 1989 and Section 25(1)(1-B) and 27 of Arms Act, however, he was acquitted of offence under Section 3(1)(v) of the Act of 1989. Appellant was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for offence under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 with default stipulation of rigorous imprisonment for six months. Further, appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Sedtion 25(1)(1-B) of Arms Act alongwith fine of Rs. 500/- and for offence under Section 27 of Arms Act, rigorous imprisonment for three years alongwith fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, appellant is to undergo 1-1 month's RI for each offence punishable under Arms Act. All sentences are to run concurrently.

(3.) Appellant has challenged the conviction and sentence passed by trial Court on the ground that none of the witnesses supported the case of prosecution, there is no evidence on record to indicate that appellant has caused death of deceased, there are major contradiction, omission and improvement in testimony of the witnesses, medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution case, necessary ingredients of offence under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 and Section 25(1)(1-B) and 27 of Arms Act are missing and evidence of prosecution could not be relied upon, therefore, appellant be acquitted and conviction and sentence passed vide judgment dated 30.07.2012 be quashed.