APPU Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred the present appeal against the judgment dated 31.7.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai in ST No.247/1996 whereby each of the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 304(I) of IPC and sentenced with ten years' RI.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that on 9.6.1996 at about 9:00 AM in the morning a dispute took place between the deceased Jairam and the appellants relating to removal of fencing between the fields of the parties near Village Vinayatha, P.S. Bandri, District Sagar. Both the parties had occupied some Government land by encroachment. In the incident the appellants assaulted the deceased Jairam by axes causing several injuries, and therefore he expired on the spot. Makhan (PW-9) and Sukhrani (PW-10), brother and mother of the deceased Jairam had also reached to the spot when the quarrel was going on and after appellant left they found that Jairam had expired, and therefore they went to contact Kotwar etc. and so many persons including Ganesh and Santosh, but nobody helped them. Ultimately Makhan went to the Outpost Ujnet of the Police Station Bandri and lodged an FIR Ex.D-2 in the Rojnamcha. Thereafter a case was registered and the matter was referred to the Police Station Bandri. The police recovered the dead body of the deceased Jairam and sent it for its postmortem. Dr. Kailash Datt Dubey (PW-5) examined the dead body of the deceased Jairam and gave a report Ex.P-10. He found as many as eight incised wounds on his body caused on both hands, legs, head, abdomen and back. A fracture was found on the parietal bone and brain matter was also found cut and by such injuries the deceased died. After due investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the trial Court, which was duly committed to the Court of Sessions and ultimately it was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai.

(3.) The appellants-accused abjured their guilt. They took a plea that initially the deceased Jairam assaulted the appellant Chhota by an axe and thereafter the appellants were falsely implicated in the matter. They examined the Head Constable Satya Gopal (DW-1) to prove their report in Rojnamcha Ex.D-1. Also they examined Shivraj Singh (DW-2) to show that the witnesses Makhan and Sukhrani were not present at the time of incident and they were intimated by one Durjan (PW-3) about the incident.