BUDDHU GOND Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred the present appeal being aggrieved with the judgment dated 3.2.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shahdol in ST No.168/2000 whereby he has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.

(2.) THE prosecution's case, in short, is that on 5.5.2000, Sudama Singh (PW4) had lodged a merg intimation Ex.P/9 at police station Jaitpur (District Shahdol) that the deceased Buddhasen Singh had expired due to injuries sustained by him. It was also mentioned in the intimation that on 3.5.2000 at about 3.00 p.m Sena Singh (PW5) visited his house situated at Village Koti (Police Station Jaitpur) and informed the witness Sudama Singh (PW4) that on 2.5.2000 at about 12.00 in the noon the appellant Buddhu Singh along with one Panda Singh had assaulted the deceased Buddhasen with the back of a Tangi (small axe) and therefore, the deceased Buddhasen sustained some injuries and he was lying in the house. Sudama Singh (PW4) had suggested the witness Sena Singh (PW5) to lodge an FIR at the Police Station. However, on 4.5.2000 at about 4.00 p.m, when Sudama Singh (PW4) went to the house of Up Sarpanch of Village Taraidol, then the mother of the accused Panda Singh informed him that at about 3.00 p.m., the deceased Buddhasen had died and both the accused had absconded. The witness Sudama Singh saw the dead body of the deceased Buddhasen lying in parachhi (verandah) of his house and thereafter, he had lodged the merg intimation Ex.P/9. The Police registered a criminal case against the appellant and one Panda Singh, by the document Ex.P/10. Dead body of deceased Buddhasen Singh was sent for post mortem. Dr. Rajesh Mithoriya (PW7) had performed the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased Buddhasen and gave his report Ex.P/16. He found three injuries to the deceased which were bruises. Out of them, two were on right chest and third one was on his head near the left ear. On opening the skull, a fracture was found in the left parietal bone. Also a depressed fracture was visible on dissection. According to Dr. Mithoriya the deceased had died due to head injury. During investigation a tangi was recovered from the appellant, which was also sent for Forensic Science analysis. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahdol, who committed the case to the Sessions Court.

(3.) THE appellantaccused abjured his guilt. He did not take any specific plea but, he has stated that he was falsely implicated in the matter. However, no defence evidence was adduced.