PARAM AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred the present appeal being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 18.9.2008 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh in S. T. No. 185/2007 whereby the appellants have been convicted for commission of offence under Sections 302 and 450 of the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of fine further 1 year rigorous imprisonment and RI for 5 years along with fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine further 3 months RI, respectively. All the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in brief are that in the intervening night of 27th & 28th of August, 2007 at about 12 O'clock, deceased Haribai was sleeping in her hut (Taparia) situated in the agriculture field of village Barkheda and at some distance in another Taparia, her mother Shantibai (PW-2) was also sleeping. Shantibai (PW2) heard noise of her daughter Haribai and rushed towards her Taparia where she saw appellants Param armed with Ballam and Khilan and another person armed with lathi. They were beating Haribai. When Shantibai (PW-2) intervened then appellants / accused persons also assaulted her and caused several injuries on her person. During the incident, Shantibai (PW-2) with a view to save herself ran from the spot and hid herself behind bushes / grass and when the appellants and their another companion went away from the spot, she went to Taparia of her daughter Haribai and found several injuries on the person of Haribai and also found her dead. In the next morning, she called her son Vrindavan who took her to Police Chowki Bandakpur where she lodged FIR Ex.P/1 and Police of Police Station Hindoria, District Damoh registered crime no. 299/07. During the investigation, dead body of the deceased was medically examined and injury of Shantibai (PW-2) was also examined by the medical expert. During the investigation, another person was also identified as co-accused Laxman Singh and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellants and co-accused Laxman Singh before the JMFC, Damoh who on its turn committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial and learned Second Additional Session Judge, Damoh tried the case and acquitted co-accused Laxman Singh, however, convicted the appellants / accused persons as mentioned above.

(3.) The finding of the learned Trial court is only based on the evidence of the injured eye witness Shantibai (PW-2) corroborated by FIR Ex.P/1, Vrindavan (PW-5), Ganeshibai (PW-4), medical expert Dr. Anuja Jain (PW-8) and Dr. Sanjeev Gupta (PW-9). The aforesaid finding has been assailed on the ground that statement of Shantibai (PW-2) is not reliable as soon after the incident she did not disclose the incident to anybody else residing nearby her and her Taparia was not so near to the Taparia of deceased Haribai that she could have heard the voice of the deceased. As she had enmity between the appellants / accused persons, they have been falsely implicated. On behalf of learned counsel for the appellants, it is further submitted that medical expert has not opined that the injuries caused to the deceased were sufficient to cause her death in ordinary course of nature and only one injury was fatal and other injuries were simple in nature and the death had taken place on account of excessive bleeding. Hence, it cannot be said that the appellants had intention to cause death of the deceased or to cause such bodily injury which was sufficient to cause her death in ordinary course of nature and hardly it can be said that the appellants had knowledge to cause such injury which was likely to cause death of the deceased. Hence, the appellants can hardly be convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC.