GUMAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For taking exception to the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants by learned I Addl. Sessions Judge, Barwani, Distt. West Nimar in the matter of Session Trial No. 388/ 96, the appellants have approached this Court by preferring this appeal. Learned I Addl. Sessions Judge, Barwani had convicted the appellants for the offence punishable u/Ss. 302/34 and 201 of IPC and sentenced each of the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine one month S.I. and two years R.I. with fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine one month additional S.I. u/S. 201 of IPC. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The short resumes of the prosecution case as narrated before the trial Court was that on 23-7-1996 police of Police Station, Rajpur was informed by Shura that his son Jagdish was lying dead near village Danod in a rivulet. Bhura came across this fact through Gokul and went to the spot and saw his son Jagdish lying dead. Murg was registered at Police Station, Rajpur vide No. 33/ 96. During the course of investigation, panchnama of the dead body was prepared, post-mortem of the deceased was performed by Dr. R. K. Dube (P.W. 11). Simple earth and blood-stained earth from the place of occurrence were seized. The injuries were found on the dead body of the deceased. On investigation, it was found that deceased Jagdish was having affair with the wife of the appellant-Binder Singh named Paru (P.W. 4). On 23rd July, 1996, Madhav (P.W.6) and deceased Jagdish met in the evening between 5 to 6 p.m. near the house of ap- pellant-Guman and Jagdish told Madhav (P.W. 6) about taking of Paru (P.W. 4) in the night. Deceased gave his and Paru's joint photograph (Article A) to Madhav and in the night between 8.30 to 9.00 p.m. deceased while standing at one portion of the house of Guman Singh where Guman was keeping motorcycle, given signal to Paru. At that juncture, Guman came out from his house and from behind, caught the neck of Jagdish. Guman took Jagdish behind his house where appellant-Binder also reached with a knife and caused several injuries on the person of Jagdish by knife. Witness Madhav (P.W. 6) was witnessing the incident while standing by the side of wall of Patvari whose house was situated adjacent to the house of Guman. It is further said that deceased fell unconscious. He was lifted and taken to the rivulet situated on the Rajpur road by the side of the house of one nurse and thrown him in the rivulet and diped the head of the deceased by pressing his neck in the water. Madhav (P.W. 6) witnessed all this incident by following them silently saving himself from the sight of the appellants. The accused-appellants were arrested and charge-sheeted.

(3.) Appellants pleaded not guilty, therefore, tried by the trial Court. The prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses to prove its case whereas defence has not examined any witness. Learned trial Court, after hearing both the parties, convicted the appellants as mentioned above.