BALAKRAM Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide judgment dated 10.9.1999, passed by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni in S.T. No.83 of 1998, the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under : CONVICTION SENTENCE

(2.) The prosecution's case in short is that the complainant Atal Singh was a widower and his biological son Sharda Prasad was living separately from last 20-25 years. Atal Singh, kept one Mankuwarbai with him but, no child was born therefore, Atal Singh and Mankuwarbai kept the accused Balakram to assist them, to look after their agriculture work and to serve them. Atal Singh, gave half of the portion of his house, one bullock cart and two bullocks to Balakram. Initially, for first six months Balakram did his work satisfactorily but, thereafter, he sold the bullock cart and the bullocks without intimating the complainant Atal Singh. Atal Singh told the appellants to vacate the half portion of the house thereafter. On 27.4.1998 at about 10.00 a.m in the morning Mankuwarbai abused a pup and the appellant Sheelabai thought that she was abused and then she went inside the house at Village Chhui (Police Station Kanhiwada, District Seoni) in the portion of Atal Singh. Sheela Bai assaulted the victim Atal Singh on his head and both the arms by an axe and thereafter, the appellant Balakram assaulted the victim Atal Singh by a stick causing injuries on his left scapular region, right knee and back. On shouting of Mankuwarbai, the appellant Balakram assaulted her also by a stick. The witnesses Narayan, Ghanshyam etc. came to the spot. Mankuwarbai also called the Sarpanch Govind, Sharda Prasad and Pancham and intimated about the incident. An FIR Ex.P/19 was lodged at Police Station, Kanhiwada. The victims were sent to the hospital and after due investigation the charge sheet was filed before the JMFC, Seoni who, committed the case to the Sessions Court and thereafter, it was transferred to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge.

(3.) The appellants abjured their guilt. They took the plea that the victims were the aggressors. They wanted to oust the appellants from their house. In defence one FIR Ex.D/1 was produced and Ghanshyam (DW1) was examined.