LAWS(MPH)-1996-9-93

DAYARAM Vs. STATE OF M.P.

Decided On September 11, 1996
DAYARAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF M.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.10.1993 of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam, passed in S.T. No. 24/92, whereby the accused -appellants have been convicted under S. 302/34 I.P.C. for having committed murder of Ambaram @ Ambuda on 7.1.92 at about 4 p.m. in village Kua Jhagar, P.S. Bilpank and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that on the date of incident (7.1.92) a feast, on the death of mother of Gangaram and his brother Dayaram (P.W. 6), was arranged. Many persons of the village have participated. Deceased Ambaram @ Ambu, his wife Sohani Bai (P.W. 1), daughter Kalibai (P.W. 5) and Shardabai also participated the same. Accused persons also participated in the feast. The feast continued from 10 a.m. to 4 -5 p.m. Sohanibai and her daughters proceeded to their houses slightly earlier at the instance of Ambaram. He also started for his house after enjoying smoke of Bidi. While coming, as such, he started talking with one Gattoo near the field of Kaniram. Bheru (P.W. 5), and Shivlal (P.W. 7) were also coming back from their field. Meanwhile accused Dayaram armed with sword and Dhariya, accused Jagdish armed with Dhariya came on the spot. They asaulted Ambaram and caused various injuries including injury on the head and chopping of the hand. Ambaram walked a few steps and fell down. Kalibai and other witnessed the incident. Kalibai raised alarm, went to her house and informed her mother Sohanbai. Sohanbai also came to the spot and found her husband dead. Other persons of village assembled, thereafter, accused persons left the place. Sohanbai informed her father -in -law and mother -in -law (Nanda and Nandi). Kaniram @ Nanuram (brother of deceased) also came to the spot.

(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the prosecution witnesses are not reliable. Sohanbai could not have seen the incident after receiving information from Kalibai. Sohanbai, Kalibai and Bheru are near relations being wife, daughter and son of deceased and, are therefore, highly interested in success of prosecution. No independent witness has corroborated the story. It has also been submitted that deceased was bully in the area. He himself was prosecuted for offence like murder and thus he had many enemies. These accused persons have been prosecuted on the basis of suspicion. Recording of statement (under S. 164 Cr.P.C.) of Sohanbai and Bheru goes to show that the prosecution doubted their veracity.