KESHAV SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is jail appeal by an accused who has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under section 302.I. P. C. The prosecution story was that in village Kamlapur, P. S. Gohad, District Bhind, on 22 -12 -1989, at about 9 or 10 a.m., Atar Singh (P. W. 1), cousin brother of deceased Mevaram, heard in his house the Mevaram was lying injured near the canal of the village. Atar Singh rushed to the deceased and found him lying sprawled on a public way near the canal of the village with a bead injury The deceased was groaning but was unable to speak anything Atar Singh carried the deceased in a bullock -cart to P. S. Gohad, but the deceased died on way Atar Singh lodged a report (Ex. P -1) at 1.00 p.m. stating that accused Keshav was seen with an axe by Hiralal (P. W. 4) and Jandel Singh (P. W. 2) sitting near the deceased when the latter was bathing at the canal some time before the crime. He also stated in the report that accused Keshav had fled away from the village after the occurrence.

(2.) THE post -mortem examination of the deceased, Ex. P -6, as proved by Dr. Bhadona (P. W 8), revealed that the deceased had sustained an incised wound 16 cm x 2 1/2 x 4 cm. on parieto occipital region of the scalp with brain tissues clearly cut and underlying left parietal bone fractured. The cause of death was head injury. There were no eye -witnesses to the crime. The case rested on circumstantial evidence. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found the following circumstances to be established : - -

(3.) IT may be mentioned here that clinching character of the circumstance about "last seen" may differ from case to case. It may be very less where, as in this case, the place where the accused was "last seen" was a place of public resort and the hour, not an unearthly hour. It may be less even when the distance of the place where the crime was committed from the place of last seen might be too great or the time gap too large. But even if the circumstance about "last seen" in a particular case is shown to have a high degree of clinching character, it may by itself perhaps be rarely sufficient to sustain the conclusion of guilt. The circumstance about "last seen" came under scrutiny in a large number of cases, but notice of two decisions of the Supreme Court might be appropriate here. In Lakhan Pal v. State of M. P., AIR 1979 SC 1620, the accused and the deceased were real brothers who were together in their field prior to the murder of the deceased in that field. Commenting on the circumstance about "last seen", their Lordships observed that the deceased was a young man aged about 17 years. If the accused would have attacked the deceased around 4.00 p. m in the field (when the crime was committed), the deceased would have undoubtedly put up stiff resistance in order to protect himself and in all probability would have caused some injuries on the person of the accused. The accused had however sustained no injuries. Hence the circumstance about both being last seen did not irresistibly lead to the conclusion that the accused must have murdered the deceased. In another case, Prem Thakur v. State of Punjab : AIR 1983 SC 61, the accused was present with five deceased persons, who were his co -labourers in a field on a previous evening and he was found to be missing from the field in the next morning. The dead bodies of five deceased persons were found in a well in the field in smoldering condition with smoke coming out from the well. Their Lordships observed that the accused was working with the deceased persons and others and there was nothing unnatural in the accused being in the Company of his companions on the evening before the murders were committed. It was said that the five deceased persons were administered liquor and while they lapsed into a deep spell of sleep, they were carried one by one to the bottom of a 35 ft. tube well and thereafter they were set on fire. The medical evidence showed that the liquor consumed by the deceased could not have produced unconsciousness. The deceased persons were young -able bodied labourers. It placed quite some strain on credulity to accept that a single person could have finished off his five companions in the fiction like manner alleged by the prosecution. The circumstance about "last seen" was held to be inconclusive. So much would suffice on the discussion of the circumstance about "last seen". Coming now to the second circumstance in the percent case, there was evidence of Chandrabhan (P. W. 5) that he had gone to the house of the accused after the matter was reported to the Police. He had found that the house of the accused was lying locked. Accused with his parents and sisters etc. was missing from the village. This was all the evidence about absconsion of the accused. There was no evidence to show that accused remained absconding for a fortnight or so and was arrested on 4 -1 -1990, when it is said that he surrendered before Supdt of Police, Bhind.