BALAKNATH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this appeal Balak Nath @ Girdharidas has challenged his conviction under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentence of imprisonment for life recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi.

(2.) The unfortunate case relates to an occurrence which took place in Aug. 1980 in which Laxmi (35) lost her life. The facts of the case are typical. It is said that accused lived in village Pomava in the temple of Lord Shiva. People believed that he could cure the diseases by 'Mantras' or witchcraft. It is said that on 15th August 1980 somebody threw five lemons in the house of Kera. After the lemons were seen in the house, all the five occupants Kera, Laxmi, Gamni, Sesia and Ramiya felt uneasiness. After about one hour, a lump of earth was also noticed by Kera in his house. On this all the five family members started moving to and fro tossing their heads and they continued to shout the names of Gods. After some time when they felt better, they approached accused Balak Nath who was in his hut in the temple. The accused read some 'Mantras' and told that everything would be alright. All the family members continued to live in the hut for five days. On 19-8-1980 at about 5 p.m. when the family members of Kera were sitting in the hut near the accused, five lemons came to be noticed and seeing them all the five members got ill. After some time there was blood from the mouth of Laxmi and she died. At that time number of villagers were present there. Accused assured the people that he would bring life back in Laxmi. However, Laxmi could not regain consciousness and hence a report was lodged in the police. On this report inquest was held under Section 174, Cr.P.C. thereafter the police recorded statement of Kera on 20-8-1980 and on that basis a case was registered under Sections 302, 323 and 342, I.P.C. The police interrogated the witnesses, inspected the site and arrested the accused. On the information given by the accused, articles viz. broom of peacock feathers 'Koont', pieces of ropes, some pieces of papers having writings on them and a hunter were recovered from the 'Sal' where the accused lived. The autopsy was held by Dr. Purohit P.W. 16 and he prepared the report Ex.P-30. He opined that Laxmi had injuries on her face and left elbow and that she had died because of asphyxia as a result of suffocation. After the completion of the investigation the accused was charge-sheeted.

(3.) Charges under Sections 302, 323 and 325 were framed against the accused who pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined sixteen witnesses. Out of them P.W. 1 Kashtura, P.W. 2 Karan Singh, P.W. 3 Arjun Singh, P.W. 4 Madan Singh, P.W. 5 Chunnilal, P.W. 7 Vane Singh, P.W. 8 Veera. P.W. 11 Kera. P.W. 12 Ramiya and P.W. 13 Sesia were examined as eyewitnesses. P.W. 6 Vagaram lodged the report Ex.P31 on the asking of the accused. P.W9 Hemadas and P.W. 10 Jesa had removed the dead body from under the Baniyan tree on the asking of the accused. P.W. 16 Dr. S.P. Purohit had performed autopsy on the body of Laxmi and had examined the injuries of Gamni, Ramiya and Sesia. P.W. 15 Doongar Singh and P.W. 14 Nahar Singh had taken part in the investigation of the case. Accused in his statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. denied accusation. However, he admitted that deceased Laxmi was in his hut and she used to toss her head. He also admitted that Laxmi died in hut. He further admitted that the dead body of Laxmi was removed from "Bur tree'' (Baniyan tree) to his "Sal". He denied that he had given beatings to Laxmi or had tortured her. He stated that he was having vow of silence during those days and he used to treat the people by 'Mantras'. Accused examined one witness Roop Singh in defence who stated that the accused used to cure diseases by giving sacred ash of cowdung to the patients. The learned Sessions Judge heard the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor and Amicus Curiae of the accused. He held that Laxmi had met homicidal death. He further held that the accused had tortured Laxmi and his act was imminently dangerous which in all prohibitility was likely to cause death he, however did not find proved charges under Sections 325 and 323, I.P.C. which were framed for the injuries of Ramiya, Sesia and Gamni. He acquitted him of these offences.