PAPPU ALIAS SIRAJUDDIN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Six persons were tried in S. T. No. 235 of 1990 of Bhopal Sessions Division on charges of committing murder of Bharat Singh and causing simple injuries to Jagdish (P.W. 5) and Shankarlal (P.W. 1) on 17-5-1990 in front of Chandbad temple in Bhopal near the Jhuggi belong ing to Shankarlal. Vide Judgment dated 10-10-1991 five accused were acquitted and appellant Pappu alias Sirajuddin was convicted u/S. 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life which is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The appellant was running a Kirana shop near the Jhuggi of Shankar. On the date of incident, i.e., 17-5-1990, at about 7.00 p.m., the appellant along with acquitted accused Maniram and Suresh were dancing in front of the said kirana shop where a tape recorder was blaring. Shankarlal protested saying that His protest went un heeded. Then he went and called Vimlabai (P.W. 2) and her husband Santram (P.W. 6) from their nearby dairy. They too requested the dancers to stop their performance which annoyed the latter who started uttering abuses and mounted assault. Bittu alias Nizamuddin dealt one blow with a wooden piece forming leg of a cot on the neck of Jagdish, maternal nephew of Shankarlal. When Shankarlal tried to intervene he was also assaulted. Then Bharat Singh, another maternal nephew of Shankarlal came to intervene and he was stabbed to death with a knife by the appellant. The incident was witnessed by Vimlabai, Santram and wife of the deceased, Deobati (P.W. 10). The deceased had brought his wife that very day for the first time after Gouna from village Chopra in Rajgarh district. After the murder the appellant and his associates made good their escape. Bharat Singh was removed to Hamidia Hospital. On receiving information police arrived in the hospital where Shankarlal lodged first information report recorded as Dehaati Nalishi (Ex. P. 1) by Ramswaroop Sharma, A. S. I. (P.W. 12). On its basis formal first information report (Ex. PP. 22) was recorded at Nishatpura police station and crime No. 211/90 u/S. 307/34, I. P.C. was registered. Town Inspector P. S. Choukesey (P.W. 14) took up investigation. Reaching the spot he prepared sketch map of the scene of occurrence (Ex. P. 7) which is in front of Jhuggi of Shankarlal. Bharatsingh succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. On receiving intima tion of his death of offence was converted u/S. 302, I.P.C. read with 34, I.P.C. Inquest was held vide Ex. P. 3 and requisition issued for post-mortem exami nation. Dr. B. P. Dubey (P.W. 11), vide autopsy report Ex. P. 20), found the following injuries on the body of Bharat Singh shown by diagram in Ex. P. 28 :

(3.) Appellants learned counsel argued that Deobati had come to her husband's maternal uncle's place for the first time on the date of the incident and was not acquainted with the appellant from before. In such circumstances, it was necessary for the prosecution to have arranged a test identification to test her power of observation. In absence of such an exercise, appellants identification by her for the first time in the Court was absolutely valueless. Reliance was placed on Kanan v. State of Kerala, AIR 1979 SC 1127 : 1982 Cri LJ 630 (2), State (Delhi Admn.) v. V. C. Shukla, AIR 1980 SC 1382 : 1980 Cri LJ 965 and Mohanlal Gangaram Gehoni v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1982 SC 839. Kanan's case (supra) was one of criminal conspiracy leading to Nexalites attack on a police station. The evi dence on criminal conspiracy was not found reli able. No member of the raided police station or staff was able to identify the miscreants. One witness testified that he had identified the appellants running away near the scene of occurrence. His evidence was found full of serious infirmities. In that context, the Court observed :