SANNA @ SANNU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has filed this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement dated 24.01.94 rendered by the First Addl. Sessions Judge, Barwani, West Nimar in Sessions Trial No. 50/92 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Versingh at 11.30 P.M. on 11.10.91 on Lanchi -Tenla Road by stone and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) FACTS lie in a narrow compass. The deceased Versingh was taking liquor in front of liquor -shop (Kalali) with his wife Bablibai (P.W. 1). After liquor, they started going home. At that stage, the appellant abused the deceased. The deceased attacked by knife. Thereafter, the appellant and two others (Ramdeo and one tall person) caught hold of the deceased Versingh and put him on the ground. His wife raised alarm. The deceased was hit on his head. Earlier the deceased had assaulted the appellant by arrow. The appellant assaulted the deceased due to this preexisting enmity. The wife P.W. 1 Bablibai lodged the First Information Report at Police Station Rajpur on 12.10.91 at 3.30 P.M. (Ex. P/1). The injured Versingh succumbed to. the injuries. Autopsy was conducted. The report is Ex. P/9. Spot map (Ex. P/2) was prepared. On 19.12.91 spot map was also prepared by Patwari. After completion of investigation, the challan was filed only against the appellant. The case was committed for trial. The Sessions Court framed the charge under Section 302 and in the alternative under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal to which the appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined P.W. 1 to P.W. 10 and tendered the documents in evidence marked as Ex. P/1, P/2 and P/9. After evaluation of evidence, the Sessions Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as above. This is impugned in this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard Shri M.A. Bohare, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Girish Desai, learned Government Advocate for the Respondent. The appellant filed I.A. No. 1481/96 under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to take cognizance against the aforesaid two persons who were not prosecuted. By order dated 17.07.96, the application was rejected, but with observation that this aspect may be considered at the time of final hearing. The appellant also filed I.A. No. 1495/96 for remand of the case to record evidence of the doctor to prove the injuries sustained by the appellant in the course of some incident. By order dated 17.07.96, the Court did not deem it fit to remand the case, but granted liberty to the appellant to raise this point after receipt of the record. The aforesaid point is, however, not pressed at the time of final hearing. As regards the question of cognizance, we shall revert to it when we appreciate the evidential material.