STATE OF M.P. Vs. PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal u/s 378 of the Cr.P.C has been filed by the State against three acquitted persons namely Prakash, Balkishan and Komal out of whom Balkishan and Komal expired during pendency of this appeal to be survived by sole respondent/accused Prakash who is acquitted of the charge of murder of deceased Kusumlata.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to present case are that on 02/06/1993 at 11.30 am complainant Nirmal Kumar (P.W.3) son of the deceased Kusumlatabai aged about 14-15 years at the time of incident was playing in a temple with Dinesh and Brijesh, when Kalyan (P.W.10) aged about 9 years came running and informed that respondent-accused Prakash was beating deceased Kusumlatabai (mother of Nirmal Kumar (P.W.3)) at the hand-pump. Complainant Nirmal Kumar (P.W.3) ran towards the hand-pump and saw respondent-accused assaulting his mother Kusumlatabai by Khaderua. He further saw respondent-accused Prakash giving 5-6 blows to his mother (deceased) with the weapon Khaderua on different parts of her body. Co-accused persons Balkishan and Komal witnessed the incident. Other persons Champalal (P.W.7) and Vikram Singh (P.W.14) came to the spot and saw the incident. The complainant's father Lalaram and mother Kusumlata had old animosity with respondent-accused Prakash arising out of report filed by the parents of Nirmal Kumar against the respondentPrakash at Police Station in respect of rape against respondentaccused Prakash which incidentally did not mature into any investigation.

(3.) Investigation was conducted and completed and chargesheet was filed. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where charge under Section 302 of IPC was framed against three accused persons including surviving respondent No.3 who denied the incident. The prosecution produced 15 witnesses but defence produced none. The respondents-accused produced and exhibited documents. After marshaling of evidence, the learned Trial Judge acquitted the accused persons including surviving respondent accused Prakash for the reasons mentioned hereinunder :