SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1958 Supreme(MP) 51

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
A. H. Khan and H. R. Krishnan, JJ.
BALLA MUNSHI BHOI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Criminal Appeal 42 Of 1957
Decided On : 02/20/1958

Advocates Appeared:
Ganga Sahai Garg, Shiv Dayal

A dead body is not a person, and therefore removing ornaments from a dead body is not taking ornaments out of the possession of a person. Such an act amounts to dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by the deceased and is an offence under Section 404 of the Indian Penal Code.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - SECTION 302 INDIAN PENAL CODE - ROBBERY - SECTION 394 READ WITH SECTION 397 INDIAN PENAL CODE - DISHONEST MISAPPROPRIATION OF PROPERTY - SECTION 404 INDIAN PENAL CODE - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE - INTERPRETATION OF LEGAL PROVISIONS - APPLICATION OF LAW TO FACTS - SUMMARY OF COURT'S DECISION

Fact of the Case:

The accused was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and robbery under Section 394 read with Section 397 of the IPC. The victim was a 7-year-old boy who was strangled and robbed of his ornaments. The accused led the police to the body and the ornaments, and he confessed to the crime before a magistrate.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accused had voluntarily confessed to the crime and that the confession was admissible in evidence. The court also found that the evidence of the witnesses who saw the accused with the victim on the day of the murder was credible. The court concluded that the accused was guilty of murder and robbery.

Issues: 1. Whether the accused's confession was voluntary and admissible in evidence. 2. Whether the evidence of the witnesses who saw the accused with the victim on the day of the murder was credible. 3. Whether the accused was guilty of murder and robbery.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the accused's confession was voluntary and admissible in evidence because it was recorded in accordance with the law and the accused had been warned that he was not bound to make a confession. 2. The court held that the evidence of the witnesses who saw the accused with the victim on the day of the murder was credible because it was consistent with the other evidence in the case. 3. The court held that the accused was guilty of murder and robbery because the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he had strangled the victim and stolen his ornaments.

Final Decision: The court upheld the accused's conviction and sentence for murder under Section 302 of the IPC. The court set aside the accused's conviction and sentence for robbery under Section 394 read with Section 397 of the IPC and convicted him instead of dishonest misappropriation of property under Section 404 of the IPC.

A. H. KHAN, J.

( 1 ) THE Additional Sessions Judge Bhilsa convieted the accused under Section 302 indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He also convicted the accused under Section 394 read with Section 397 I. P. C. and sentenced him to 7 years rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were to run concurrently. Aggrieved by his convictions and sentences the accused has filed this appeal.

( 2 ) THE victim in this case is Batton, a boy aged about 7 years. His natural father harikrishan had given him in adoption to Halku P. W. 1. At the time of the occurrence, Battan was living with his adoptive father in village Bagri. The accused balla was also a resident o the same village. Since the accused and the boy (Battan) be lived in the same village, they got friendly. The accused Balla owned a vegetable-farm situated on the outskirt of the village. On 24-2-57, before noon, battan visited the field of his adoptive father, who at that time was carrying on winnowing operations. The boy then was wearing a coat and had a cap on his head, besides two golden Murkies, silver bangles and two anklets. It is said that from the field of his father Battan went towards the accused who was of is farm collecting brinjals. About that time Halku asked Shyamlal P. W. 2 (his servant) to bring bullocks from the grazing field so that the corn may be thrashed. Shyamlal went to the grazing ground where he met the accused Balla and also Battan. Shyamial asked Battan to come along with him and help him in taking the bullocks to his father's field. The young boy (Battan) refused to go with Shyamlal and told him that he would rather assist his friend Balla, in collecting brinjals at the farm. A few hours after this, Halku's wife (adoptive mother of Battan) came to Halku and enquired about Battan who had not been to the house to take his noon-meal. Halku told his wife not to worry about the boy who must be playing somewhere. As the evening approached, and, Battan did not turn up, they naturally became anxious. They told Laxminarayan, who was the Muk-kadam of the village about the disappearance and thereafter the whole village was astir and a vigourous search was made for the missing boy. They also asked the accused Balla about battan, but he denied knowledge of his whereabouts. When the search yielded no result, a report was ultimately made at police station. Bhilsa, the following day (Ex. P1 ). The Police Officer reached the village at about 6 P. M. , and in the course of his investigation he also questioned Balla. the accused. The accused is said to have told the Police Officer in the presence of other villagers that he had strangled the boy and buried his body in a Nalla which was about a mile from the village. The accused led the Police Officer and the withesses to the nalla where he dug out some earth and brought forth the body of the deceased from a pit. A rope was found tied to the neck. The following morning at. the instance of the accused, Murkies, silver bangles and anklets of the deceased were al o recovered from the vegetable-farm of the accused. The accused appears to have told the Police that he the with' coat and the cap in a well. But no discovery of those articles was made, and the efforts of the Police in that direction resulted in blank.

( 3 ) THE evidence in this case against the accused mainly consists of (1) persons who saw Battan with the accused on the fateful day, (2) the discovery of the body, (3) discovery of the ornaments, the boy was wearing, at the instance of the accused, (4) his confession before the Magistrate and (5) the admission of his guilt which he made before the Committing Magistrate. I proprose to examine the evidence referred to above.

( 4 ) SHYAMLAL P. W. 2 has deposed that on the fateful day, he saw the accused and battan together near the vegetable-farm known as Bhatoi. Parma P. W. 7 says that he saw Battan in the vegetable- farm.

( 5 ) THERE is ample testimony on the record, which is not challenged








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top