2007(2) JLJ 309
Miss Sheela Khanna and S.A. Naqvi, JJ.
Mohar Singh v. State of M.P.
Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 1995 (Gwalior) : against judgment of
VI Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, Camp Dabra, passed in
Sessions Trial No.247 of 1993; Decided on 9.4.2007.
Complaint Harnam Singh (PW4) was going towards Chopal. On way, he saw that the appellant and Ajab Singh (acquitted co-accused) were hurling abuses to his brother deceased Bhagwan Singh. Deceased Bhagwan Singh objected to it. On this, the appellant said "Tera Muha Bahoot Chalta Hai Abhi Thuz Ko Niptata Hun". Ajab Singh then instigated the appellant Mohar Singh to bring his gun. Thereafter, appellant went running to his house and brought muzzle loaded gun of his father. Ajab Singh exhorted the appellant to kill the deceased. Thereafter, the appellant fired a shot at the deceased causing injuries over the neck of the deceased, who fell down and died. At that time, Sarman Singh (PW2) was standing nearby and a pellet of the gun hit on his chest. [Para 3
Held : Harnam Singh (PW4) in para 22 has simply stated that the appellant wanted to make an influence on the deceased (Bhagwan Singh Pe Rob Jamane Ke Liye). But in the report (Ex.P5) or in the police statement (Ex.D-5) this witness has not mentioned about the fact that the appellant wanted to make an influence or show his influence. But at the same time, he admitted that before the incident, there was no dispute between the deceased and the appellant. The appellant had caused a single gun-shot injury, on being instigated by co-accused Ajab Singh. Thus, if there was no dispute or quarrel or enmity before the incident and it has not been made clear by the witnesses as to what was the cause or reason for hurling abuses then certainly it can be inferred that the genesis of the occurrence has not been established in this case, though, it is proved beyond doubt that the appellant fired a gun-shot injury to the deceased resulting his death. Therefore, in view of the observation made by the apex Court in the case of Surendra Singh @ Bittu v. State of Uttaranchal [2006(2) Crimes 167 (SC)], the offence committed by the appellant would not fall under section 302 of IPC, but in our considered view, the offence would fall under section 304 of IPC. 2006(2) Crimes 167 (SC) followed. [Para 21
(2) Criminal Practice -- witnesses clearly stating that appellant fired shot causing injury on the neck of deceased -- infirmity on point of distance from where shot was fired -- not material. [Para 14
(3) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S.8 -- cogent evidence of eye-witnesses available -- motive need not be proved. [Para 18
(4) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- Ss.161 and 154 -- injured witness -- admitted in hospital -- name mentioned in FIR -- investigation officer could not attend him in hospital -- delay in recording police statement is not fatal. [Para 17
(5) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- Ss.227/228 -- charge of minor offence not framed initially -- rightly not framed thereafter because of re-examination of witnesses -- this alone does not afford any ground to seek acquittal. [Para 18
(6) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- Ss.157 and 154 -- proof of compliance of S.157 -- FIR recorded without any delay -- police reached immediately -- prepared spot map and inquest report same day -- sent the dead body same day -- there cannot be any doubt that FIR was ante-timed or antedated -- non-proof immaterial. [Para 19
(7) Penal Code, 1860 -- S.304 Pt.I -- offence under -- imprisonment for more than 7 years suffered -- no useful purpose would be served if again sent to jail -- sentence of undergone imprisonment imposed enhancing fine to Rs.15,000/-. [Para 22
¼1½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 304 Hkkx 1 rFkk 302 && ?kVuk dk mRl LFkkfir ugha && iwfoZd >xM+k ;k ‘k=qrk ugha && canwd dk dsoy ,d Qk;j fd;k x;k tks e`R;q esa ifj.kkfer gqvk && vijk/k /kkjk 304 Hkkx 1 ds v/khu vkrk gSA ifjoknh gjuke flag ¼v lk 4½ pkSiky dh vksj tk jgk FkkA ekxZ esa mlus ns[kk fd vihykFkhZ vkSj vtc flag ¼nks"keqDr lg&vfHkqDr½ mlds HkkbZ e`rd Hkxoku flag dks nqoZpu dg jgs FksA Hkxoku flag us bl ij vkifRrÙk dhA ml ij ls vihykFkhZ us dgk] ^^rsjk eq¡g cgqr pyrk gS vHkh rq>dks fuiVkrk gw¡**A vtc flag us rc mldh canwd ykus ds fy, eksgjflag dks izsfjr fd;kA rRi‘pkr~ vihykFkhZ vius ?kj nkSM+rk gqvk x;k vkSj vius firk dh HKjekj canwd ys vk;ka vtc flag us vihykFkhZ dks ekj Mkyus ds fy, izsfjr fd;kA rRi‘pkr~ vihykFkhZ us e`rd ij ,d Qk;j fd;k ftlls e`rd dh xnZu ij {kfr;k¡ gqbZa vkSj og fxj x;k rFkk ej x;kA ¼iSjk 3 vfHkfu/kkZfjr % gjuke flag ¼v lk 4½ us iSjk 22 esa ek= dFku fd;k gS fd vihykFkhZ] e`rd ij izHkko Mkyuk pkgrk Fkk ¼Hkxoku flag ij jkSc tekus ds fy,½A fdarq fjiksVZ ¼izn‘kZ ih&5½ esa ;k iqfyl dFku ¼izn‘kZ Mh&5½ esa bl lk{kh us bl rF; ds ckjs esa mYys[k ugha fd;k gS fd vihykFkhZ izHkko Mkyuk pkgrk Fkk vFkok izHkko nf‘kZr djuk pkgrk FkkA fdarq lkFk&gh] mlus Lohdkj fd;k gS fd ?kVuk ds iwoZ e`rd vkSj vihykFkhZ ds e/; dksbZ >xM+k ugha FkkA lg&vfHkqDr vtc flag dh izsj.kk ij mlus canwd ds Qk;j dh dsoy ,d {kfr dkfjr dh gSA bl izdkj] ;fn ?kVuk ds iwoZ dksbZ >xM+k ;k eyg ugha Fkk rFkk lk{khx.k }kjk bl ckjs esa LI"V ugha fd;k x;k gS fd nqoZpu dgs tkus ds fy, D;k dkj.k Fkk] rc fuf‘pr gh ;g fu"d"kZ fudkyk tk ldrk gS fd ekeys esa ?kVuk dk mRl LFkkfir ugha fd;k x;k gS] ;|fi] ;g lansg ls ijs lkfcr gS fd vihykFkhZ us e`rd dks canwd ds Qk;j dh Pkfr dkfjr dh ftlds ifj.kkeLo:i mldh e`R;q gks xbZA blfy,] lqjs‘k flag mQZ fcV~Vw fo- mÙkjkapy jkT; [2006¼2½ ØkbEl 167¼,l lh½] ds ekeys esa loksZPp U;k;ky; dh leqfDr dh n`f"V ls vihykFkhZ }kjk dkfjr vijk/k na-iz-la- dh /kjkk 302 ds v/khu ugha vk,xk] fdarq gekjh lqfopkfjr jk; ls vijk/k na-iz-la- dh /kkjk 304 Hkkx 1 ds v/khu vk,xkA 2006¼2½ ØkbEl~ 167¼,l lh½ vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 21 ¼2½ nkafMd izFkk && lk{khx.k dk Li"V dFku fd vihykFkhZ us canwd dk Qk;j fd;k ftlls e`rd dh xnZu ij {kfr dkfjr gqbZ && tgk¡ ls Qk;j fd;k x;k mldh nwjh ds fcanq ij ‘kSfFkY; && rkfRod ughaA ¼iSjk 14 ¼3½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 8 & izR;{kn‘khZ lk{khx.k dk fu‘pk;d lk{; miyC/k && gsrq lkfcr fd;k tkuk vko‘;d ughaA ¼iSjk 18 ¼4½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 161 rFkk 154 && {kfrxzLr lk{kh && vLirky esa HkrhZ && izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ esa uke mfYyf[kr && vUos"k.k vf/kdkjh mlls feyus vLirky ugha tk ldk && iqfyl dFku vfHkfyf[kr fd, tkus esa foyac ?kkrd ughaA ¼iSjk 17 ¼5½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 227@228 && xkS.k vijk/k dk vkjksi vkjaHk esa fojfpr ugha fd;k x;k && lk{khx.k ds iqu% iqujh{k.k ds dkj.k rRi‘pkr~ Bhd&gh fojfpr ugha fd;k x;k && nks"keqfDr dh bZIlk ds fy, ek= ;g vk/kkj ugha gks ldrkA ¼iSjk 18 ¼6½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 157 rFkk 154 && /kkjk 157 ds vuqikyu dk lcwr && izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ vfoyac vfHkfyf[kr && iqfyl rRdky igq¡ph && LFky ekufp= rFkk e`R;q leh{kk fjiksVZ mlh fnu rS;kj dh && ‘ko mlh fnu Hkstk x;k && dksbZ lansg ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ iwoZ≤kafdr vFkok iwoZ&fnukafdr Fkh && lkfcr ugha fd;k tkuk egRoghuA ¼iSjk 19 ¼7½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 304 Hkkx 1 && vijk/k && 7 o"kZ ls vf/kd dkjkokl Hkksxk && iqu% tsy Hksts tku dk dksbZ vFkZiw.kZ iz;kstu fl) ugha gksxk && tqekZuk :-15]000@& rd c<+krs gq, Hkksxs x, dkjkokl dk naMkns‘k vf/kjksfirA ¼iSjk 22
Miss Khanna, J. -- 1. Challenge in this appeal by the appellant-accused is the impugned judgment and order dated 21.3.1995 passed by Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior Camp Dabra, in ST No.247/93, whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further imprisonment of three months.
2. Appellant-accused Mohar Singh is son of Gulab Singh (acquitted co-accused_. Complainant Harnam Singh (PW 4) is real brother of the deceased Bhagwan Singh. These facts are not disputed.
3. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell, is that on 9.3.1993 at around 1:30 p.m., complainant Harnam Singh (PW4) was going towards Chopal. On way, he saw that the appellant and Ajab Singh (acquitted co-accused) were hurling abuses to his brother deceased Bhagwan Singh. Deceased Bhagwan Singh objected to it. On this, the appellant said "Tera Muha Bahoot Chalta Hai Abhi Thuz Ko Niptata Hun". Ajab Singh then instigated the appellant Mohar Singh to bring his gun. Thereafter, appellant went running to his house and brought muzzle loade gun of his father. Ajab Singh exhorted the appellant to kill the deceased. Thereafter, the appellant fired a shot at the deceased causing injuries over the neck of the deceased, who fell down and died. At that time, Sarman Singh (PW2) was standing nearby and a pellet of the gun hit on his chest. Complainant Harnam Singh (PW4) went to the Police Station Bhitarwar and lodged the first information report (Ex.P-5) and informed about the death of his brother on which Merg intimation (Ex.D-5) was recorded. The Investigating Officer Mahesh Shrivastava (PW8) reached on the spot and prepared spot-map (Ex.P-2). He issued Safina Form (Ex.P-7) to prepare Panchnama of the dead-body of the deceased. Thereafter, Panchnama of the deceased (Ex.P-1) was prepared. Blood stained soil and simple soil were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P-3).
4. Dr. Ramprasas Saral (PW7) conducted the autopsy on the dead-body of the deceased. He found following ante-mortem injuries vide his report (Ex.P-11) :
"(1) Circular wound of 1.5 cm x 1 cm with abraded colour on medial aspect and it's margins were inverted to its wound of entrance which was situated on left side of neck and 4.5 cm blow left ear and 6 cm from mid line;
(2) Circular wound of 2 cm x 2 cm and it's margins were averted and situated on right side of neck below 5 cm of right neck and 6 cm from mid line."
On internal examination, Dr. Saral (PW7) found rupture of right carolid artery and other vital organs of neck due to gun shot injuries. The cause of death was sever haemorrhage as a result of gun-shot injuries. The blood stained clothes - Pent, Shirt, Baniyan and underwear were seized by the doctor and the sealed packet of the clothes were handed over to the police. On medical examination of the injured Sarnam Singh (PW2), a lacerated wound on his chest in left side of size 3-1/2" x 1-1/2" x skin deep was found and clotted blood was found on the wound and the injury was as a result of fire-arm. On X-ray one opacity of metallic density was seen in middle and lateral portion of chest left side vide X-ray report (Ex.P-9). The appellant Mohar Singh and co-accused Gulab Singh and Ajab Singh were arrested. It is alleged that on the basis of memorandum recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act (vide Ex.P-14) of appellant Mohar Singh and at his instance, a double barrel gun with ten rounds was seized from him. Co-accused Gulab Singh was licensed holder of this gun. All the seized articles-blood stained soil, simple soil, clothes of the deceased, seized double-barrel gun and the rounds were sent for chemical examination to FSL, Sagar. As per report (Ex.P-23) of FSL, Sagar, except on simple soil, and underwear of the deceased, in all other articles blood stains were found. The seized gun was found in working condition and gun-shot holes were found in the shirt and Baniyan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.