Back
2018 Supreme(MP) 411
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
(DIVISION BENCH)
Sanjay Yadav and Ashok Kumar Joshi, JJ.
Patru v. State of M. P.
Criminal Appeals No. 600 and 647 of 2000 (Gwalior);
against the judgment and sentence dated 10.8.2000, passed by the
II Additional Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar, District Guna in Sessions Trial No. 53/1999; Decided on 29.6.2018
R. K. Shrivastava and R. K. Goyal for appellants;
B. P. S. Chouhan, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Headnote:(1) Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 302 -- Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 45 -- medical evidence that deceased died because of failure of operation of his abdomen
-- not challenged by prosecution -- is binding on prosecution. [Para 15
(2) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss.302 and 325 -- deceased received three simple injuries and one internal injury -- cause of death in post-mortem report was cardio-respiratory failure due to perforation peritonitis as a result of blunt injury of abdomen and its complications -- doctor deposed that reason of death was failure of surgical operation -- inference by trial Court that injuries sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death were inflicted -- contrary to medical evidence -- not proved that deceased's death was homicidal -- only offence punishable under section 325/149 proved. [Paras 30 & 32
(3) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 302/149 and 325/149 -- complainant and two others received simple injuries -- only one received grievous injury which was also not on vital organ -- could not be inferred that it was common object of constituted unlawful assembly to murder deceased, complainant or any of his family members -- deceased died twenty days after receiving injury on abdomen -- at the most, it was proved that common object of unlawful assembly was to cause grievous injury. [Paras 29 & 31
(4) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss.148 and 147 -- offence punishable u/s. 148 is graver than offence punishable under section 147 -- appellant convicted under section 148 -- separate conviction under section 147 liable to be set aside. [Para 36
¼1½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 302 && lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 45 && fpfdRlh; lk{; fd e`rd ds mnj dh 'kY;fØ;k dh vlQyrk ds dkj.k mldh e`R;q gqbZ && vfHk;kstui{k }kjk vk{ksfir ugha && vfHk;sktui{k ij vkc)dj gSA ¼iSjk 15
¼2½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 302 rFkk 325 && e`rd dks rhu lknk {kfr;ksa vkSj ,d vkarfjd {kfr igq¡ph && 'ko ijh{k.k fjiksVZ esa e`R;q dk dkj.k mnj esa dqan {kfr ,oa mldh tfVyrkvksa ds ifj.kkeLo:i ijQksjs'ku isfjVksukbfVl ds dkj.k ân;&'okl iz.kkyh dh foQyrk && fpfdRld dk vfHklk{; fd e`R;q dk dkj.k 'kY;fØ;k dh foQyrk && fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk fu"d"kZ fd izÑfr ds lkekU; vuqØe esa e`R;q dkfjr djus ds fy, i;kZIr {kfr;k¡ igq¡pkbZ xbZ &&- fpfdRlh; lk{; ds izfrdwy && lkfcr ugha fd e`rd dh e`R;q ekuo o/k Lo:i dh Fkh && dsoy èkkjk 325@149 ds v/khu naMuh; vijk/k lkfcrA ¼iSjk 30 ,oa 32
¼3½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 302@149 rFkk 325@149 && ifjoknh rFkk nks vU; dks lknk {kfr;k¡ igq¡ph && ek= ,d dks xaHkhj {kfr igq¡ph] tks ekfeZd vax ij Hkh ugha Fkh && ;g fu"d"kZ ugha fudkyk tk ldrk fd xfBr fof/kfo#) teko dk lkekU; mís'; e`rd] ifjoknh vFkok mlds dqVqac ds fdlh lnL; dh gR;k djus dk Fkk && mnj ij {kfr igq¡pus ds chl fnu i'pkr~ e`rd dh e`R;q gqbZ && vf/kd ls vf/kd ;g lkfcr gqvk fd fof/kfo#) teko dk lkekU; mís'; xaHkhj {kfr igq¡pkus dk FkkA ¼iSjk 29 ,oa 31
¼4½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 148 rFkk 147 && /kkjk 148 ds v/khu naMuh; vijk/k] /kkjk 147 ds v/khu naMuh; vijk/k ls vf/kd xaHkhj gS && vihykFkhZ /kkjk 148 ds v/khu nks"kfl) && /kkjk 147 ds v/khu i`Fkd~ ls nks"kflf) vikLr fd, tkus ;ksX;A ¼iSjk 36
Joshi, J. -- 1. By this common judgment being passed in Criminal Appeal No. 600/2000, another Criminal Appeal No. 647/2000 is also being decided as both these appeals have been filed by relating appellant under section 374 of the CrPC against the judgment dated 10th August, 2000, passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar, District Guna in Sessions Trial No. 53/1999, whereby each of the appellants of both these appeals has been convicted and sentenced under section 302 of the IPC to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- with default stipulation; under section 325 of the IPC to undergo three years RI with a fine of Rs. 100/- with default stipulation; under section 324/149 of the IPC to undergo two years RI with a fine of Rs.100/- with default stipulation; under section 148 of the IPC to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs. 100/-; and under section 147 of the IPC to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs. 100/- with default stipulation, and it is also directed by the impugned judgment that all the main jail sentences of each appellant to run concurrently.
2. Admittedly appellants Lallu, Madan and Maniram are sons of appellant Parma and appellant Patru and co-accused Hamira are sons of Kapura and coaccused Hamira is a deaf and dumb person, hence the trial Court vide impugned judgment convicted Hamira for the above mentioned offences but it referred Hamira’s case under section 318 of the CrPC to this Court and this Court has decided the reference in relation to Hamira vide judgment dated 30.4.2001 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 2217/2000. Similarly, injured prosecution witnesses, complainant Munnalal (PW1), Dulichand (PW4), Udham (PW5) and deceased Bharosa are real brothers and Parwati Bai (PW3) is mother of the deceased and in village Gata, both parties are neighbourers and deceased Bharosa and other injured prosecution witnesses were residing jointly in a house at the time of incident and the distance of village Gata from Police Station Shadora is about 8 Kms.
3. Prosecution’s case in brief is that on the date of incident 8.8.1998 complainant Munnalal (PW1) with his mother Parwati Bai and brothers Udham, Dulichand and Bharosa reached to Police Station Shadora and at 9:00 p.m. lodged FIR (Ex.P-2) regarding incident occurred at 7:00 p.m. of same day to the effect that at 7:00 p.m. after returning from field to house, he was putting his plough in his house, then all five appellants of both these appeals with Hamira came to complainant’s house and asked the complainant that why he carried out his plough with oxen from their field, then complainant replied that his oxen were not climbing on par, therefore, he took out plough from their land and in future plough will not be carried out from their field. On this issue, appellant Maniram inflicted injury by his stick over Munnalal’s left shoulder. Appellant Lallu caused farsa injury over the head of Munnalal and blood was oozing out, then complainant’s mother Parwati Bai (PW3) and his brothers Bharosa, Udham and Dulichand came on scene of occurrence to save complainant, then appellant Parma gave lathi blows to Parwati Bai and caused injuries. Appellant Lallu caused farsa injury over Bharosa’s forehead and blood was oozing out from that injury. Other brothers of complainant Dulichand and Udham were jointly beaten by all the appellants and Hamira by sticks, farsa and axe. Appellants gave threatening to complainant and injured persons that if the matter is reported then they would be killed in future. The incident was seen by Shivraj Singh (PW8), Ramdayal, Salman (PW10), who also intervened. After incident by tractor all the injured persons with complainant reached police station and the FIR lodged by Munnalal (PW1) was scribed by ASI Baijnath Singh (PW17).
4. After lodging the FIR, injured persons were sent for medical examination to Primary Health Centre (PHC) Shadora, where Block Medical Education (BMO) Dr. H.H.N. Garg (PW20) medically examine
