JHUMKA BAI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., appellant Jhumka Bai @ Ramkanya Bai has challenged the judgment dated 26/8/1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhar in Special Case No. 498/1996 whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 304-II of the IPC and sentenced the appellant to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of the payment of fine, the appellant was to undergo additional 6 months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 23.10.1996 Khuman Singh S/o. Sobhan filed a report at police station Naalcha that he was living in village Beda-Berkheda and was a farmer and on the said day he was working in the field behind his house along with his wife Surajbai, sister-in-law Gulka Bai and wife of Karan Singh Radha Bai and they were plucking groundnuts. At around 3 p.m. when Khuman Singh went to drink water Jhumka Bai wife of Chhagan started hurling abuses at Gulka Bai. He also came to the spot. Jumkabai was accusing Gulka Bai as to why she was spoiling the name of her mother-in-law by calling Chhinal and a witch; and that is why Jhumka Bai hurled abuses in filthy language and she was wielding darata started assaulting Gulka Bai on the back and ribs by wrong side of the darata and she cast several blows. Khuman Singh reached there and tried to pacify the matter. As a result of the injury, blood started oozing out of the wound and she became unconscious. However, on hearing her shouts for help her brother Munna had come there and took up her the house and gave her some water to drink. However, Gulka Bai died. On the basis of the report, the offence was registered against the accused appellant under Section 302 of the IPC and FIR was registered at crime No. 104/96 and the investigation was launched and the statements of the witnesses were recorded, spot map was prepared and merg was registered and dharata was sized from the spot itself. On completion of investigation, the accused was duly charged for offence under Sections 302 of the IPC and committed to her trial.

(3.) The accused/appellant abjured her guilt and stated that complainant Khumansingh tried to grab her land and therefore, she has been falsely implicated in the matter. However, On the basis of the evidence on record, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as herein above indicated. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed the present appeal.