SAHABLAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal Nos.228/2009 and 282/2009 and Criminal Revision No.580/2009 have been filed against a common judgment dated 13.01.2009 passed in Sessions Trial No.134/2008. Three accused persons were tried for commission of offence punishable under Sections 342, 294, 506 (Part II), 302, 302/34 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial Court held appellant Sahablal and Kanchedi guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 342, 294 & 506 (Part II) of IPC and awarded sentence of RI for one year, RI for three months and RI for three years alongwith fine of Rs.1000/-, Rs.500/-, Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation RI for one month, RI for 15 days and imprisonment for one month respectively. The trial Court further held appellant Sahablal and Kanchedi guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 302/34 of IPC respectively and awarded life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation RI for one month.

(2.) The trial Court held accused Billa @ Mukesh guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 342, 294 and 323 of Indian Penal Code and awarded sentence of RI for one year, RI for three months and RI for one year alongwith fine of Rs.1000/-, Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- with default stipulation RI for one month, RI for 15 days and RI for one month respectively. The trial Court acquitted accused Mukesh from the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC and convicted him in other Sections as mentioned above. Accused Mukesh did not file any appeal against his conviction. However, complainant Paramlal filed Criminal Revision No.580/2009 against acquittal of accused Mukesh from the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC.

(3.) Prosecution story in brief is that on 22.02008, when the complainant Paramlal was at his house, at around 3:15 O'clock he received information on mobile from his brother-in-law Chandan that Sahablal and others had encircled him. Paramlal went on the spot alongwith his brothers Laxmi and Balmukund on a motorbike. He noticed that Sahablal, Kanchedi and Billa had encircled his brother-in-law Chandan. He asked the accused persons that why they had encircled Chandan. At that time, Billa had inflicted a blow of lathi at Balmukund. Thereafter, Kanchedi abused him and exhorted Sahablal to kill other persons. At that point of time, Sahablal had fired a gun shot at deceased Laxmi, which had hit on his head. He fell down. All the three accused persons ran away from the spot. Deceased was brought to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Report of the incident was lodged at the police station. Police conducted investigation and filed charge-sheet. During trial appellants abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. The trial Court, after trial, held them guilty as mentioned above.