SHIV Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 30-4-1986 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in S.A. No. 253/85 convicting the appellants for committing offences under Sections 302/149 and Sections 323/149 I.P.C. and sentencing each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life and six months R.I. respectively.

(2.) Facts leading to this appeal in short are that police Makdon, Distt. Ujjain submitted a charge- sheet against the present appellant before the J.M.F.C. Mahidpur u/ss. 147, 148, 149 and 307 I.P.C. on the allegations that on 18-11-1985, at about 7 A.M. at village Borkhedi, the appellant accused formed an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing the murder of Dhula s/c Bhagga and to cause simple injuries with blunt weapons to Balu and Narmadabai and in pursuance of that common objett, committed the murder of Dhula by inflicting injuries on him and also caused simple injuries to Balu and Narmada Bai at the same date time and place.

(3.) The cause of the incident as alleged by the prosecution was that deceased Dhula had intially married his daughter Shantabai with accused appellant Deva. As Deva was ill-treating her, deceased Dhula got her second marriage performed to one Bhanwar of village Sherpur due to which the accused-appellants bore grudge against the deceased. At the time of the incident, Shantabai, her mother Narmadabai, brother Balu and her father deceased Dhula were at their house. All the six accused persons armed with deadly weapons reached the house of Dhula and asked him as to why he had performed second marriage of Santabai and thereafter saying now they will kill himTT, they started beating Dhula. Chander dealt a blow with a Dharia, on the head of Dhula Deva dealt a blow with a Hallam. Rajaram and Mangu dealt blows with Dharia. The deceased raised an alarm, hearing which, Narmadabai came out of the house, to whom Jaggu and Shiva dealt blows with lathis. Balu was also dealt blows with lathis when he came out of the house. Seeing this incident Shantabai ran towards the temple and accused persons went towards the Jungle. When she came back, she found her father lying in an unconscious condition. She went to Chowkidar and in his company she lodged a report at the police station, which is Ex. P. 29. On the report, the police started investigation and during the investigation, it was found that the injured Dhula succumbed to his injuries. After the investigation an offence u/s 302 IPC along with other sections of the IPC was found to have been committed by the accused persons. Accordingly, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons before the J.M.F.C. The learned Magistrate after, perusing the documents, committed the case for trial to the Court of Session. The learned ASI who tried the case, vide his impugned Judgment found the appellants guilty and consequently convicted and sentenced them as above. Hence, this appeal. 3. It is not disputed before us that the deceased Deva died a homicidal death. This ism also borne out from the testimony of Dr. Patidar, who bad performed the autopsy on the dead body of Dhula. According to Dr. Patidar there were II injuries on the person of the deceased. Injury No.1 was an incised wound, injury No. 2 was a lacerated wound. Injuries 3 to 4 were penetrating wounds. Injury Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 were lacerated wounds and injuries 9 and 10 were abrasions and injury no. 11 was a penetrating wound. According to Dr. Patidar, Dhula died by stopping of heart due to flow of excessive blood, and he had died within 12 to 24 hours of the examination of the dead body. The testimony of Dr. Patidar finds corroboration from the testimony of P.W. 12 Shantabai, P.W. 13 Narmadabai and P.W. 14 Balu, who were the witnesses of the occurence. As such we concurs with the finding of the trial court that the deceased Dhula died a homicidal death.