VIRAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the accused/appellant (hereinafter referred to as *the accused') has called in question the soundness of the judgment passed by the learned Special Judge, Jabalpur in S. T. No. 675/2001 whereby he has recorded a conviction against the accused in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'the IPC') and sentenced him to undergo the rigorous imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer further imprisonment of ten days on the first count and fine of Rs. l. 000/-, in default, to suffer imprisonment often days on the second score.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17-5-2001 in the mid afternoon the father-in-law of the deceased was in his paddy field and the buffalos of the accused entered inside the field and caused damages. Ramvati (P. W. 4), tried to drive away the said animals and at that stage the accused abused and slapped her. Hearing the cry of Ramvati her husband, Dorilal, came there. The accused gave a blow of 'lathi' on his head. At that stage the son of the accused, Dharmendra, also assaulted the deceased Dorilal on the back region with 'lathi'. They also abused the deceased. The said incident was witnessed by Godhan (P. W. 3), and others. The Bhojran (P. W. 1) informed at the Police Station, Belkheda which is situated about 12-13 Kms. away at about 3. 15 p. m. On the basis of First Information Report lodged the investigating agency registered a crime. It is the further case of the prosecution that Dorilal and Ramvati were sent for medical examination to the hospital and during the treatment Dorilal breathed his last. The investigating agency got the autopsy done of the deceased; prepared spot map, seized 'lathi' at the instance of the accused; got certificate of the deceased from the Sarpanch vide Exhibit P-12 as it was alleged that he belonged to Scheduled Caste; and had sent the articles as per Exhibit P-13 to the Forensic Laboratory and examined number of witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr. PC, After conducting the inquiry the investigating agency placed the charge-sheet before the Competent Court, namely, Special Court constituted for trying the offences punishable under SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(3.) THE accused denied and disputed the indictment and pleaded innocence. He also took a plea of alibi.