KHELAWAN Vs. KING-EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by one Khelawan Chamar from a conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and a sentence of transportation for life and a conviction under Section 328, of the Indian Penal Code and a sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment, which would, of course, run concurrently with the sentence of transportation for life. The convictions and sentences have been arrived at in consequence of the act of the appellant in giving powdered dhatura seed in some sattu, possibly with the addition of some gur, to two men Jaichu and Baran.

(2.) The facts of the case are very clearly set out in the judgment of the trial Court. It is the usual story of greed to obtain possession of a few rupees which were in the possession of Baran. With the usual sort of introductory conversation and proposals to obtain the confidence of his victims the appellant succeeded in inducing them to partake of some "sattu" which he had with him. Then he disappeared on the pretext of going to case himself, presumably with the intention of returning later. As to whether he did return, there is no evidence as Jaichu and Baran suspecting that Khelawan might be a thug left the place. An hour or two after these two had partaken of the "sattu," of which Khelawan himself had refused to take any share on the ground that he was suffering from dysentery, Jaichu, the principal prosecution witness in this case, began to feel ill and shortly afterwards Baran was taken ill. Nothing more was heard of them until the next morning a chaukidar on his rounds found Baran dead lying in some water and Jaichu apparently unconscious and rolling in pain. The chaukidar took the necessary steps to have Jaichu taken to hospital. He was taken to the Mau hospital where dhatura poisoning was diagnosed and he was let out upon his recovery after some three or four days. The viscera of Baran was sent to the Chemical Examiner, and it was established that he had died of dhatura poisoning.

(3.) Jaichu narrated the whole affair from the beginning up to the time when he himself was taken ill. There is nothing whatever in his story to lead us to doubt that he is telling the whole truth. No enmity against him whatever is even alleged by the appellant. His story is supported by witnesses who saw Khelawan in the presence of Jaichu when he was on the way to buy the gur. There is the shop- keeper who sold the gur to him and at least one witness who saw them together, that is Baldeo. The prosecution witnesses identified the accused in jail on the 23rd of February 1926, and there appears no reason for suspecting the genuineness of the identification then carried out. There is one point which we may mention. There is no evidence on the record that we have been able to find or to which counsel for the appellant and the Government Pleader have been able to draw our attention to show whether Jaichu made any statement of any sort to anybody as how he came to be poisoned, between 4-30 p.m. on the 21 of December 1925 when he regained consciousness in the hospital, and the 24 of December 1925, when he made his first report. It appears incredible that on the 21st, 22nd and 23rd, while he was apparently fully conscious in hospital, he should have had no conversation with anybody. It is true that anything he might say then would not be substantive evidence in itself, but it would have been, if what he said was in accordance with his present story, a valuable corroboration of his first report.