LAWS(MPH)-2018-7-347

PARTIES NAME ZHANNULAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Decided On July 11, 2018
Parties Name Zhannulal Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 04.12.2008 passed in Sessions Trial No.184/2008. The appellant was prosecuted for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial Court held the appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and awarded sentence of life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulation RI six months.

(2.) Prosecution story in brief is that on 13.06.2008, appellant had gone to attend a marriage in the village. His wife was in the house. The appellant returned back to his house in the night alongwith the deceased Preetam. The door of the house of the appellant was not locked. On that ground, the appellant got annoyed with his wife and started beating her. At that time, deceased came there. He asked from the appellant that why he was beating his wife. The appellant inflicted injuries to the deceased also. He had tied both the hands and legs of the deceased and also tied his neck by a gamchha (towel). Thereafter, the appellant had killed the deceased. On the next day, in the morning, the incident was reported to the police by Shankar Goli. Police registered FIR and conducted investigation and filed charge-sheet against the appellant. The appellant abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. The trial Court, after trial, held the appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 of IPC and awarded sentence as mentioned above in the judgment.

(3.) Learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant has submitted that so called eye witnesses, on which the trial Court placed reliance, are not the eye witnesses of the incident. There are major contradictions and omissions in the evidence. Hence, the trial Court has committed error in holding the appellant guilty for the offence. In alternate, the learned counsel has submitted that the offence committed by the appellant would fall under Section 304 Part I of the IPC.