RAM KHILAWAN KUSHWAH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second accused in the charge sheet failed before the Sessions Court Jabalpur, has filed this petition to quash the charge framed against him (along with the first accused), u/s. 302/34 of the I.P.C.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, there was a monetary transaction between the second accused and the deceased which led to misunderstanding and ill -feeling. On two occasions, the two accused went to the deceased's house and in his absence and in the presence of his mother, uttered threats against the deceased. A day before the occurrence, the two accused were heard discussing about doing away with the deceased. On the day of occurrence, viz. 4.6.92, when the deceased was going on his cycle, the first accused hit him from behind with a Farsa as a result of which he died instantaneously. A person who came across the dead body, informed the police who registered a case. First accused was arrested and the weapon of offence was recovered on the basis of information furnished by him. Second accused was also implicated and final charge sheet was filed against him. In due course, the Court framed charges against both the accused u/s. 302/34 I.P.C.

(3.) THE leading case on section 34 of the I.P.C. is of Barendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor (AIR 1925 PC 1). The decision speaks of 'participation in action' which expression has been discussed elaborately and explained in several decisions of the Supreme Court.