LAWS(MPH)-2013-2-25

MOOKAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Decided On February 13, 2013
Mookam Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid two appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated dated 24th March 2000 rendered in Sessions Trial No. 149/99 by the Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Guna (M.P.). Since the judgment and order challenged in these appeals is one, they are herewith taken up together for hearing and decided by this common judgment.

(2.) THE appellants herein stood convicted by the trial court for commission of murder of Tofan Singh, which is an offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000.00, each, in default of payment of which to serve additional two months' rigorous imprisonment. They are further held guilty to cause disappearance of the evidence regarding commission of murder with an intention to screen the offender from legal punishment by putting a dead body of Tofan Singh on a railway track, which is an offence punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C. and accordingly sentenced to suffer three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 300.00, each, in default of payment of which to suffer one month's additional rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences under the judgment were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) THE appellants in their respective appeals contended that the conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial Judge is against the evidence on record and the law applicable to the present case, hence, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside. It is argued that in the instant case the deceased was last seen with accused and thereafter his dead-body was found lying under suspicious circumstances, however, there is no reliable evidence to establish that the accused /appellants cased death of deceased which shows that the chain of circumstantial evidence which the prosecution placed before the trial Judge is not complete to indicate that it is only the accused-appellants who killed the deceased. The prosecution utterly failed to bring home all circumstances connecting the accused with the alleged crime. It is thus prayed that by allowing the appeals, the conviction and sentence as accorded by the learned trial judge be set aside and the accused be acquitted of all charges.