RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Sec. 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "Cr.P.C.") against the impugned judgment dtd. 11/2/1999 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in ST No.115/98, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC") and sentenced to undergo 7 years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000.00, with default stipulation of 2 months R.I.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 14/8/1998 at about 7 p.m. appellant/accused came to the house of Vinod and asked to accompany him up to his field. At that time appellant Ramsingh had a sickle in his hand. Complainant Vinod after informing his mother and grand-mother accompanied Ramsingh and both of them proceeded towards the field of the appellant. When they reached at the public funeral place, appellant caught hold Vinod and started beating him, due to which Vinod fell down. Then appellant gave number of blows by sharp cutting weapon sickle (Darata), due to which Vinod sustained various injuries over his mouth, chest etc. Vinod slowly came towards the village and fell down on the 'Otla' of Mangilal and informed about the incident to his mother and grand-mother. Thereafter complainant Vinod lodged an FIR (Ex.P/6) at P.S. Narayangarh. Accordingly offence has been registered. Complainant was sent for medico legal examination, which was conducted by Dr. S.N. Dube (PW-9). Investigating officer seized two broken teeth, one bed-sheet, some torn parts of the shirt, one slipper from the spot. Blood stained clothes and sickle were also seized from the possession of the appellant. All the seized articles were sent for chemical examination and the FSL report Ex.P/11 has been received.

(3.) After completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed and trial court framed the charges under Sec. 307 of IPC against the appellant. Appellant abjured the guilt and prayed for trial. Prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses, while defence has examined one witness before the trial Court. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned hereinabove.