SAMPAT BAI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 21/8/1998 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore in Session Trial No. 18/1996 whereby appellant No. 1 has been convicted under Sec. 326/34 of the IPC and appellant No. 2 has been convicted under Sec. 326 of the IPC and both of them have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.5000.00 and in default of payment of fine amount, to suffer further R.I. for 1 year each.

(2.) As per the case of the prosecution, on 12/11/1995 at about 9.10 AM, one Babulal lodged report at Police Station, Doraha, District Sehore that when his brother Narayan Singh was sitting in the house of Suraj then appellant No. 2 Ramesh slapped his child, namely Hukum. The deceased objected to the same, At that juncture, appellant No. 1 Sampat Bai (mother of appellant No. 2 Ramesh) came there and handed-over "Karpa' to appellant No. 2 Ramesh and exhorted him to kill Narayan Singh. Appellant No. 2 Ramesh gave "Karpa' blow on the thigh of Narayan Singh as a result of which he sustained fatal injury and main artery of his thigh got cut. Narayan Singh was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. The police registered offence under Sec. 302 and 302/34 of the IPC against the appellants. After due investigation charge-sheet was filed against the appellants.

(3.) Learned trial Court framed the charges under Sec. 302 and 302/34 of the IPC against the appellants and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record passed impugned judgment holding that offence under Sec. 302 and 302/34 of the IPC is not made out against the appellants. Trial Court found that appellant No. 2 Ramesh caused grievous and fatal injury on the thigh of the deceased with sharp cutting object as a result of which main artery of his thigh got cut and in the aforesaid act of appellant No. 2, appellant No. 1 Sampat Bai had actively participated as she gave the weapon in question (Karpa) to appellant No. 2 Ramesh. Trial Court also observed that since the appellants had no intention to kill the deceased, therefore, no case under Sec. 302 and 302/34 of the IPC is made out against the appellants. However, the trial Court found appellant No. 1 guilty of offence under Sec. 326/34 of the IPC and appellant No. 2 under Sec. 326 of the IPC and convicted and sentenced them as mentioned above.