JITENDRA GARG Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by judgment dated 10th December, 2007 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Gwalior in Special Case No. No.101/2006, whereby in a trial, which was conducted against three persons namely; Munna @ Petha, Bhola @ Jitendra Garg and Pawan Garg, learned Special Judge has convicted the present appellant Bhola @ Jitendra Garg of the charges under Section 302 of IPC on account of murder of Bhallu @ Suresh with life imprisonment, whereas he has been acquitted form the charge under Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per prosecution story on 05.07.2006 between 5.00-5.30 pm, deceased Bhallu @ Suresh had visited Bagicha Beer Bar alongwith his friend Keshav Maratha. They had called for a bottle of liquor. Accused were also present in the bar and they approached Keshav Maratha and asked him to share bottle of liquor with them but when deceased Bhallu @ Suresh and Keshav Maratha refused to share such bottle of liquor, there was some dispute and they were threatened when accused left. Thereafter between 6.00-6.30 pm Keshav Maratha (P.W.2) was returning from the Beer Bar alongwith the deceased when at Karbari Mohalla in front of house of Ravi Dhobi, accused Pawan and Munna stopped him. In the Meanwhile, present appellant Bhola @ Jitendra came out of the shop of the tailor armed with Baka. When objected the deceased and Keshav Maratha tried to run away but Pawan and Munna Petha exhorted Bhola not to leave him when Bhola @ Jitendra had attacked deceased with Baka on rear side of head, as a result of which deceased started bleeding. At this point, appellant had again attacked the deceased with his Baka, which he tried to save with his hand but the injury caused to the deceased was so fatal that he died subsequently. This incident was seen by Vikram (P.W.1) and Ganesh (P.W.3.)

(3.) It is submitted that in fact, FIR (Ex.P/1) was recorded at the instance of Vikram (P.W.1), in which present appellant is a named accused.