MAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 has been preferred by the sole accused-appellant against his impugned conviction and sentence recorded in Sessions Trial No. 10/1998 vide judgment dated 18/2/03 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Datia (M.P.), convicting the appellant for commission of murder of one Rameshwar, which is an offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. The accused was further held guilty for possessing firearm belonging to deceased without any valid reason, which is an offence punishable under Section 25(1)(1-B) (a) of the Arms Act and punished him to suffer one year's rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 29th October 1997 Rameshwar, accompanying accused Man Singh, Mathura, Hari carpenter (Badai) and Hari Ram went to Bhander. At that time, he worn golden chain and ring and was also keeping his licensed gun with him. After leaving the place alongwith the said companions, it was alleged that he did not return back. On 30th October 1997, at about 5 p.m., when brother of Rameshwar alongwith his nephew Heera Singh, as usual, went to lit a candle on the platform (Emory place of his father), he saw from just ten steps distance, dead body of his brother Rameshwar. On reaching he found that Rameshwar died of gunshot injury. The ornaments i.e., golden chain and ring including the gun which his brother were having were missing. Then he returned back and informed about the incident to Karan Singh, Mohan Singh, Net Singh and Chandrabhan Singh. At about 7 p.m., he lodged the F.I.R. (Ex.P/6) at the police Station Bhander. Police reached the spot and started investigation, The dead-body was sent for postmortem. After arrest of accused Man Singh, the gun belonged to deceased, which was looted after commission of crime, was seized from him. The gun and cartridges were examined by the Firearm Expert in the Forensic Science Laboratory Sagar. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the criminal court having jurisdiction. On committal, the Sessions Trial was put in motion. After recording the prosecution and defence evidence, accused-appellant Man Singh was convicted for the alleged offences. Accused Mathura was not arrested and during trial he was declared absconded. However, other accused Harisingh and Hariram were acquitted by the trial court of the same charges. Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the appellant Man Singh has preferred the instant appeal.

(3.) PER contra, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the respondent/State contended that the prosecution succeeded to prove the guilt against the accused by statement of eye-witness Atmaram (PW-7) before whom, the accused killed the deceased by gunshot injury as well as medical and recovery of the alleged weapon. Complainant Hakim Singh (PW-6), Jagat Singh (PW-3), Karan Singh (PW-8), Mahendra Singh (PW-10), Mohan Singh (PW-12) and Jagdish Singh (PW-16) deposed that on 29th October 1997, deceased Rameshwar having his 12 bore gun alongwith accused Man Singh, Hariram and Hari carpenter (Badai) left his village Madhopur for Bhander and on next day on 30th October 1997, his dead body was seen at nearby platform of Raghavlal, his father. Thus, deceased Rameshwar was last seen with accused Man Singh and others named above. The gun belonged to deceased Rameshwar (weapon of crime) was recovered from the possession of accused. Other incriminating articles seized from the spot and gun with empty and four live cartridges were sent to Regional Forensic Science Laboratory for their chemical examination. The report of the Senior Scientific Officer-cum-Ballistic Expert confirmed vide his report dated 5th May 1997 that 12 Bore gun seized from accused Man Singh, which was marked as Article A-2 was in a workable condition and there was a sign of firing present in the said gun. The hole found in Baniyan also confirmed the gunshot firing caused by 12 bore gun as per the report of the Chemical Examiner/Forensic Science Officer. It is, thus, argued that the prosecution by adducing such evidence successfully proved the guilt of the accused and as such the learned trial Judge rightly convicted and sentenced him. Hence, it is prayed that by dismissing the appeal, the conviction and sentence of the accused be maintained.