STATE OF M.P. Vs. MOHANLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.12.1983 passed by the High Court of Mahdya Pradesh at Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No. 450 of 1980 arising out of Sessions' Trial No. 90 of 1980.

(2.) THE respondents were charged under sections 302/149 as well as under section 449 LP.C. The respondents Mohan Lal and Chhagan Lal were further charged under section 148 I.P.C. and rest of the respondents stood charged under section 147 LP.C. They were convicted under different counts by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur for having killed the deceased Mangi Lal after dragging him out of his hut and thereafter assaulting him mercilessly and' throwing acid on him. On appeal the High Court acquitted all the respondents and hence the present appeal.

(3.) MR . Shukla, learned senior counsel appearing for the State - appellant contended that the High Court erred in law in discarding the dying declaration recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, PW. 10, on very flimsy grounds and thereby erred in law in acquitting the accused persons. Mr. Shukla, further contended that the deceased having given out the names of all the accused persons to PW.1 who reached the place of occurrence while deceased was crying for help and further the deceased himself having gone to the Police Station and lodged the report giving a brief narration of the incident and the medical evidence being corroborative of the same, the conclusion is irresistible that the prosecution has been able to establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore the order of acquittal is wholly illegal. Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents on the other hand contended that the dying declaration being the sole basis of conviction and for justifiable reasons the High Court having discarded the same and having acquitted the accused persons, said order of acquittal should not be interfered with by this Court. In support of the conclusion of the High Court that the dying declaration, Exhibit P -15, recorded by the Magistrate does not inspire confidence, Mr. Sushil Kumar submitted that the very fact that the deceased has not stated that he was brought outside being dragged and was assaulted and acid was thrown on him, could lead to the only conclusion that the assault was committed inside the hut and therefore under such circumstances, the occurrence having taken place in the mid -night, it will be wholly impossible to identify the assailants and consequently the said dying declaration has rightly been discarded by the High Court.