HARI NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31.10.2016 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sehore in Special Case No.06/2006, whereby, the trial Court has held the appellant guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- with stipulation for rigorous imprisonment of six months in case of default, respectively.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant was having a one sided love affair with the deceased Sagar Bai on account of which Champalal (PW/5) brother of the deceased had reprimanded the appellant, due to which, the appellant had left the village. According to the prosecution, a year thereafter, the appellant returned back and again started harassing the deceased Sagar Bai, whereupon he was again reprimanded by Champalal (PW/5), brother of the deceased. According to the prosecution, deceased Sagar Bai had complained against the appellant to the teacher of the school Ramlal Jat (PW/3) as well as to her brother Champalal (PW/5). On 10.12005 in the morning the deceased Sagar Bai alongwith Lalita Bai (PW/1), her sister-in-law had gone to the hand-pump situated in front of the school to fetch the water and while returning from there, the appellant attacked Sagar Bai from behind with an axe and delivered a blow at the root of her neck, on account of which, she fell down on the spot and succumbed to her injuries.

(3.) The prosecution had relied upon the statements of four eye witnesses Lalita Bai (PW/1), Savitri Bai (PW/2), Santra Bai (PW/8) and Smt. Sauram Bai (PW/9) who have clearly deposed before the Court below that they had seen the appellant inflicting the fatal blow on the back of the neck of the deceased with an axe. The prosecution also took support from the statement of Dr. R.S. Verma ((PW/10) who conducted the postmortem and deposed that the deceased had suffered an incised injury at the root of her neck which had resulted in severing of the spinal cord as well as the seventh cervical vertebra, and that she died on account of the aforesaid injuries.