Back
1996 JLJ 217
R.P. Awasthy and Rajeev Gupta, JJ.
Niman Sha v. State of M.P.
Cr. A. No. 1296 of 1995; against the judgment of Shri A.K. Patel, 2ndAddl.
Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, passed in Sessions Trial No. 47 of 1995;
Decided on 28.11.1995.
(2) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 302 and 84 -- accused committing two murders by reason of unsoundness of mind -- en tiled to the exception of S. 84.
It is true that merely because the crime committed is ghastly and there appears to be no reason or motive for its commission, it would not, by itself, bring the case within the compass of the general exception contained in section 84, of the IPC. Nevertheless it has to be seen in the present case that there was some previous history of the accused suffering from mental disorder. When he was apprehended soon after the incident, the accused was not behaving normally. During the period of investigation also, the accused suffered an attack of insanity. Now in this background it has to be seen that the accused committed murder of two old ladies, in a very cruel manner, without any reason or rhyme. [Para 21]
In view of the provision contained in section 334, CrPC, the finding is being given that the accused committed murder of two ladies by chopping the heads off their bodies, by means of an axe. However, he did the said ghstly criminal act by reason or of unsoundness of mind on account of being incapable of knowing the nature of the act, as constituting the offence, or that it was wrong or contrary to law. Therefore, the said criminal act would come within the compass of general exception enumerated in section 84 of the IPC and the accused is entitled to get benefit of section 84 of the IPC. 1990 CrLJ 97 relied on. [Para 22]
(3) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S. 335 -- accused chopped heads of two ladies under abnormal condition of mind -- ordered to be kept in mental asylum for treatment.‘ [Para 23]
¼1½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 329 & U;k;ky; dh tkudkjh esa vkus ij fd vfHk;qDr foÑr fpr gS & bl /kkjk ds v/khu fofgr çfØ;k viukbZ tkuk gksxh & ,slh çfØ;k dk ikyu ugha fd;k tkuk & fopkj.k dks ‘kwU; dj nsrk gSA 1983 lhvkj ,y ts 1769 voyafcrA ¿iSjk 17 ¼2½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 302 rFkk 84 & vfHk;qDr }kjk foÑrfprrk ds dkj.k nks gR;k dkfjr & /kkjk 84 ds viokn dk gdnkj gSA ;g lR; gS fd dsoy bl dkj.k fd dkfjr vijk/k Hk;kud gS vkSj mls fd, tkus dk dksbZ dkj.k vFkok gsrq çdV ugha gSa] Lo;eso ekeyk na-ç-la- dh /kkjk 84 esa varfoZ"V lk/kkj.k viokn dh ifjf/k esa ugha vk tk,xkA rFkkfi] bl ekeys esa ;g ns[kuk gksxk fd vfHk;qDr dk euksfodkj ls ihfM+r gksus dk dqN iwoZo`Ùk FkkA ?kVuk ds rqjar i‘pkr~ tc mls fxj¶rkj fd;k x;k] vfHk;qDr dk vkpj.k lkekU; ugha FkkA vUos"k.k dh vof/k ds nkSjku Hkh] vfHk;qDr dks ikxyiu dk nkSjk iM+k FkkA bl ifjçs{; esa ;g ns[kuk gksxk fd vfHk;qDr us nks o`) efgykvksa dh gR;k fcuk fdlh gsrq vkSj rqd ds cgqr Øwj <ax ls dkfjr dhA ¿iSjk 21 na-ç-la- dh /kkjk 344 esa varfoZ"V mica/k dh n`f"V ls] ;g fu"d"kZ fn;k tk jgk gS fd vfHk;qDr us mu nks efgykvksa dh gR;k dqYgkM+h ls muds ‘kjhj ls flj dkV dj dkfjr dhA rFkkfi] mlus ;g dfFkr Hk;kud vkijkf/kd ÑR;] mlds Lo:i dh tkudkjh esa vleFkZ gksus ls fd mlls vijk/k xfBr gksrk gS vFkok ;g xyr Fkk ;k dkuwu ds foijhr Fkk] foÑrfpÙkrk ds dkj.k fd;k FkkA blfy,] dfFkr nkafMd ÑR; na-ç-la- dh /kkjk 84 ds Qk;ns dk gdnkj gSA 1990 lhvkj ,y ts 97 voyafcrA ¿iSjk 22 ¼3½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 335 & vfHk;qDr us fpÙk dh vlkekU; n’kk esa nks efgykvksa ds flj dkVs & ekufld fpfdRlky; esa mipkj ds fy, j[kk tkuk vkfn"VA ¿iSjk 23
R.P. Awasthy, J. -- 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, Shri A.K. Patel, has made these joint references pertaining to Sessions Trial No. 46 and 47 of 1995, in which accused Niman Sha was charged with having committed, on or about 6.12.94, murders of Nanjo Bai and Jhini Bai at village Dhalapathar and Karanpiparia, and thereby committing offences punishable under sections 302 and 302, of the IPC. In both of the said Sessions Trials the accused has been held guilty for committing the said offences and the present references have been made under section 366', of the Cr.P.C., for confirming the death sentence recommended to be awarded to the accused appellant. The accused has also filed two appeals against the said judgments, delivered in Sessions Trials referred above, of holding him guilty for committing offences punishable under section 302 and 302, of the IPC, and recommending to sentence him to death. The said references, made under section 366 Cr.P.C., and Criminal Appeals referred above shall be decided simultaneously, by this single judgment.
2. From the documents filed in the trial Court, the prosecution case emerges as below :--
Niman Sha is the eldest son of Raman Sha. After getting up in the morning, he all of a sudden ran away from his house. Raman Sha followed him. Raman Sha met him just below the hillock, and after apprehending him, Raman Sha was taking Niman Sha back to his house. At that time, accused/appellant Niman Sha was having an axe. When, while returning towards their house, Raman Sha and his son accused/appellant Niman Sha, reached a rivulet and were crossing it, the accused started quarrelling with his father Raman Sha. He threatened to cause hurt to Raman Sha. At that time Nanjo Bai (since deceased) was harvesting 'kutki' crop near the said rivulet of village Dhalapathar. When Niman Sha started quarrelling with his father and adopted an aggressive attitude, Nanjo Bai tried to pacify the accused by saying as to why he was not paying heed to what his father was saying.
3. Thereafter, the accused/appellant went alongwith his father upto some distance. There, all of a sudden, Niman Sha pushed Raman Sha aside and taking the axe in his hand, he reached the place where Nanjo Bai was cutting 'kutki' crop and started dealing blows by means of the said axe on the neck of Nanjo Bai. The accused severed the neck and head from the remaining part of the body of Nanjo Bai, thereby causing her instantaneous death on the place of the incident itself. The said incident was witnessed by Gullo Bai (PW-4), who told the said fact to Balbati (PW-3). The accused went away from the first place of the incident, that is rivulet of dhalapathar, and proceeded towards village Karanpiparia. On reaching Karanpiparia, the accused dealt axe blows on the person of yet another old lady, Jhini Bai and cut her like a fire-wood. The neck and head of Jhini Bai was also severed from her body, by the accused, causing her instantaneous death, on the place of the incident itself.
4. Thereafter the news that Niman Sha had chopped the heads of Nanjo Bai and Jhini Bai spread in villages Dhalapathar and Karanpiparia, and other adjoining very small villages, consisting of few hutments only. On receiving the said information Champalal, Deshrath, Lakhan, Chamru, Raman and other persons got collected and apprehended the accused. At that time the accused had thrown the axe away. On being asked as to where he had thrown the said axe, the accused told Champalal the place where he had thrown the said axe. Champalal brought the said axe.
5. All the said persons tied the accused with a tree by means of a rope, at Dhalapathar (Kharakala). On the same day, at about 8.05 PM, Champalal went to police station Junnardeo, where he lodged the FIR (EX. P-3). After recording the said FIR, Shri Akhil Verma (PW-S), reached the place of the incident. As it had already gone dark in the night, he started investigation from the next date. On 7.12.94, usual dea
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
