ANIL KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 23.8.2005 passed by the District Sessions Judge, Khandwa. The trial Court has held guilty the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment.

(2.) Prosecution story in brief is that on the date of the incident the deceased was sleeping in the house after taking meals. He was alone in the house. Appellant entered into the house at around 4-5 O'clock in the morning. He had inflicted injuries on the stomach of the deceased by blade. Thereafter, he left the house. Neighbours came to know about the incident and noticed the deceased in injured condition. They informed the police. Sub-inspector of Police reached on the spot and he recorded Dehati Nalsi, thereafter the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 21.4.2003 at around 8.00 O'clock in the morning. He was died in the night. On the basis of Dehati Nalisi Police registered FIR and filed the charge sheet. During trial appellant abjured guilt and pleaded innocence. Trial Court held appellant guilty for commission of offence under Section 302 of IPC and awarded sentence of life.

(3.) Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has contended that appellant has been convicted on the basis of Dehati Nalisi (Ex. P.16) which was recorded by P. W.14. The trial Court treated Dehati Nalisi as dying declaration. The witnesses who were present at the time of recording Dehati Nalisi along with the deceased. P. W. 9 and P. W. 4 deposed that the deceased was not in a condition to speak, hence, trial Court has committed error of law in convicting the appellant on the basis of Dehati Nalisi. In support of his contention learned Senior counsel has relied on the judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Pawan Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh reported in (2017) 7 SCC.