BAKHORA SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH three persons including appellant, were put on trial, latter alone suffered conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), others having been acquitted of the charges on conclusion of trial by the Trial Court. Appellant for his conviction under Section 302 IPC was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) ESSENTIAL features of the prosecution case, which are not in much details, can be noticed with brevity. South to village Harnahi, a canal flows, which is the source of irrigation of the fields of the villagers and it seems that on the alleged date of incident, while Ramdeni Singh (PW 7) was irrigating his land from the canal water, along with his father, Narendra Singh grappled with the latter when he resisted and diverted water channel to his field. After Ramdeni Singh slapped Narendra Singh, latter went to his house. Father too left the place for meal. However, shortly thereafter, Ramdeni Singh saw Bakhoran Singh (hereinafter referred as appellant) going in the company of Narendra Singh, Dhirendra Singh and Girija Singh, holding double barrel gun. Apprehending danger, though Ramdeni Singh went towards village Surmi but followed that track, when they met Manik Singh (hereinafter called the deceased) near Murdghatti (cremation ground), Dhirendra Singh and others welded their lathis which was returned in the same coin by the deceased. Appellant then fired shots on the deceased who dropped dead. Appellant and others accompanied him and thereafter retired from the place of occurrence. It was the son of the deceased who set the ball in motion and launched prosecution against appellant and others. As usual, investigation followed, in course of which, Investigating Officer recorded statement of witnesses, visited place of occurrence, seized blood stained earth, wearing apparels, frame of spectacles of the deceased, prepared inquest report over dead body of the deceased and sent the dead body of the deceased to mortuary for post -mortem examination and on receipt of post -mortem report, laid charge -sheet before the Court on conclusion of investigation. At trial quite a good number of witnesses, who are 14 in numbers, were examined by the State to which we shall advert at later stage.

(3.) SINCE manifold contentions were raised on behalf of the appellant to assail the findings recorded by Court below, lest we loose sight of them, we shall prefer to discuss with brevity, narratives of the prosecution case unfolded in the statement of the witnesses. Reiterating his earliest version, Ramdeni Singh (PW 7) states that he was irrigating his land along with his father from the canal water. He had gone for meal to his house and when he came, noticed Narendra Singh grappling with his father for diverting the water channel to his land. He, however, set him aside reprimanding for his conduct with an old person. The said Narendra Singh, however, left the place with firm determination to irrigate his land. Father too left the field for his house for meal, and at about midday, appellant came in company of Narendra Singh, Dhirendra Singh and Girija Singh holding double barrel gun with him. Those who had accompanied him were holding lathi with them. Apprehensive of danger, though he escaped towards village Surmi, but followed them, and while his father was going along with his family members, they happened to meet appellant and others. Then Dhirendra dealt lathi blow on the deceased followed by shots fired by the appellant. The deceased having sustained gun shot injury in the abdominal region, dropped dead. The witness says that while going to police station, where he rendered his statement, he also met Mukhiya and Sarpanch to whom incident was narrated by him, when the Police had visited place of occurrence. Blood stained earth and reminiscences of explosion of bomb was seized by him. Police had also seized frame of spectacles of the deceased.