JANIRAM Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and have been sentenced to imprisonment for life for committing murder of Dhansai.

(2.) It is not in dispute that appellant No. 1 Janiram and deceased Dhansai were real brothers. Kekribai (P.W. 1) is the widow of the deceased. Appellant No. 2 Samaru is distantly related to him. Ramadhar (P.W. 4) at the relevant time was working as a labourer in the field of the deceased. There was a dispute between the two brother is and the deceased had filed an application for partition which was allowed by the Revenue Court on 11/2/1982 and the field was divided between the two brothers and since then the deceased was in possession of that portion of the field known as Matarsi-Khar. The prosecution case is that on 6/11/1982 at about 9 am the deceased, his wife Kekribai and Ramadhar were transporting the harvested paddy from Matarsi-Khar They had already loaded two bullock-carts and while they were loading third bullock-cart, both the appellants came there, appellant No. 1 Janiram was armed with a sword and appellant No. 2 Samaru with an axe. Appellant No. 1 first gave a blow with his sword on the head of the deceased and then he was further assaulted by these appellants, as a result the deceased fell down dead with multiple injuries. Kekribai accompanied by Chowkidar Kartikeshwar (P. W. 2) went and lodged a report Ex. P. 1 at 1 P.M in police station Raigarh. 5 Kms. away. The police then took up investigation, seized blood-stained earth from the spot, prepared panchnama of the dead body and sent it for postmortem examination. Dr. T. R. Sahu (P. W. 3) on doing autopsy found as many as 10 injuries on the head, neck and other parts of the body causing fracture of the skull, clavicle bone mandible bone, ulna and metacarpal bones. The injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The appellants were taken into custody and from appellant No. ls possession, bloodstained sword. (Article A) and 2 Dhotis were seized as per seizure memos Ex P. 17 and P. 18 The incriminating articles were sent for chemical examination and Chemical Examiner vide report Ex. P. 24 found presence of blood in the sword and Dhotis of appellant No. 1. On completing the investigation the appellants were charge-sheeted for the murder. Their defence is of denial and false implication. Relying in the testimony of Ramadhar (P. W. 4) corroborated by kekribai to the extent that she had seen both these appellants running away from the spot with weapons in their hands, the F.I.R. and the medical evidence, convicted both these appellants for the murder.

(3.) Shri P.R. Bhave, learned counsel for the appellants contended that (i) no overt act has been alleged against the appellant No. 2 Samaru in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 1. (ii) the trial Judge has not accepted Kekribai to be the eyewitness and the sole eye-witness is Ramadhar (P W. 4) but according to him both these appellants assaulted the deceased with the sharp side of sword and axe but there are no incised injuries found on the dead body and, therefore, he is an unreliable witness, and (iii) Kekribai has admitted that appellant No. 1 was in cultivating possession of the disputed field and, as such, he has a right of self defence of property inasmuch as the deceased had been forcibly harvesting and taking away paddy from his field. According to Shri Dilip Naik, learned Government Advocate, the case has been proved beyond doubt against both these appellants and requires no interference.