KAMLENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved of the judgment dated 14/11/2017 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in ST No.95/2015, whereby the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

(2.) In brief the facts of the case are that on 23.6.2015 at around 11:00 AM when complainant/ deceased Durga Prasad Kewat was going on a bullockcart along with his son Ram Pratap from Village Damchua to Village Pukhra, and when he came across the house of Vishal Gond, at that time appellant Kamlendra Singh and juvenile Upendra Singh came with sticks in their hands and due to dispute which had occurred between the parties around four months ago, started abusing them and Durga Prasad Kewat was dragged from the cart and was beaten by the accused persons, although his son Ram Pratap tried to stop them, but they did not listen and at that time another accused Guddan alias Lokendra also came on the spot and put the injured Durga Prasad Kewat back in the cart and also threatened them of dire consequences. A report in this respect was made at around 1:03 PM on the same day i.e. on 23.6.2015 and Crime No.41/2015 was registered against the present appellant, co-accused Guddan alias Lokendra and juvenile Upendra Singh. Injured Durga Prasad Kewat was taken to the PHC Rakseha where he was referred to the District Hospital, Panna. Dr. Sharad Chourasiya (PW-1) examined injured Durga Prasad Kewat and gave his MLC report (Ex.P-1), however at around 4:00 O'clock injured Durga Prasad Kewat succumbed to the injuries hence a marg intimation (Ex.P-11) was also recorded. Postmortem report (Ex.P-16) was prepared by Dr. Neeraj Jain (PW-16). On account of death of deceased Durga Prasad Kewat, Section 302 of IPC was also added. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the learned Judge of the trial Court after recording the evidence has convicted the appellant as aforesaid. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no case under Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC can be made out against the appellant, as even according to the post-mortem report (Ex.P-16) prepared by Dr. Neeraj Jain (PW-16), the deceased had received as many as 12 injuries but there was hardly any injury except injury No.9 which was on the head, which can be said to be grievous in nature. Although from the internal examination the doctor has found that his third, sixth and seventh ribs were fractured and on account of this fracture, his internal organs specially the right lung had an injury. He had also a fracture on the left humerus and the cause of death is said to be the injury caused on the lung.