LAWS(MPH)-2012-7-54

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. RANDHEER SINGH

Decided On July 13, 2012
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appellant
V/S
RANDHEER SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 30.6.1997 passed in ST No.328/1996 by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar by which the respondents were acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324/149 of IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in short, is that on 20.7.1996 at about 6:00 PM complainant Harprasad (PW-6) was taking his bullocks from his field to his house situated in the village Orja. When he reached in front of the house of respondent Dev Singh, the respondents collected with the sticks. Respondent Dev Singh had an axe. They started assaulting the complainant Harprasad. On hearing his cry, Harnam Singh (PW-10), Munna (PW-7), Jahar Singh (PW-5), Nathuram (PW-11) etc. came to the spot and tried to save the victim Harprasad, but the respondents assaulted them due to which they also sustained injuries. Thereafter the respondents threatened the complainant and other persons that if the report was lodged about the incident, then they would be killed. complainant Harprasad was taken to the Police Station where he lodged the FIR Ex.P-15 at about 11:50 PM. The injured persons were sent to the hospital for their examination and treatment. Dr. A.K.Dave (PW-13) examined the injured Munna, Jahar Singh, Harprasad, Harnam Singh and Nathuram and prepared his reports Ex.P-18A to Ex.P-23A. All of them sustained simple injuries. Injury No.1 of Harnam Singh which was on his lumber region was found to be caused by a sharp cutting weapon whereas injuries of other victims as well as the victim Harnam Singh were found to be caused by hard and blunt object. After due investigation, the police had filed a charge sheet before the concerned Magistrate, but since a counter case was triable by the Court of Sessions, because one Ghanshyam was killed, present case was also committed to the Sessions Court so that it could be tried simultaneously with the counter case. Ultimately, it was transferred to the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.