MANOJ SINGH vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(MP) 773

High Court of Madhya Pradesh
G.S.Ahluwalia, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, JJ.
MANOJ SINGH & ORS. – APPELLANTS
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – RESPONDENT
CRA Nos. 37 and 99 of 2010
Decided On : 10-11-2021

Headnote:
The court's decision in this case hinged on the interpretation of several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the application of legal principles governing culpable homicide, murder, and the common object of an unlawful assembly.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved two criminal appeals arising from a judgment of conviction and sentence passed by a trial court in a murder case. The appellants, Umesh Singh and Manoj Singh, were convicted under sections 302 (murder) and 148 (rioting) of the IPC, while other co-accused were convicted under section 302/149 (murder committed in prosecution of common object) and 148 of the IPC.
Finding of the Court:

The court upheld the trial court's findings and dismissed the appeals. It held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants, along with other co-accused, had committed the murder of the deceased, Raghvendra Singh, in furtherance of their common object.
Issues: 1. Whether the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature? 2. Whether the offense falls within the purview of 'murder' and 'attempt to murder'? 3. Whether the aforesaid acts were done in fulfilling the common object?
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the following legal principles and provisions of the IPC: * Culpable homicide is the first kind of unlawful homicide and is defined under section 299 of the IPC. It is the causing of death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death. * Murder is a species of culpable homicide and is defined under section 300 of the IPC. It is the intentional causing of death, or the intentional causing of such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused. * Section 307 of the IPC deals with attempt to murder and provides punishment for acts done with the intention or knowledge that, if they had caused death, would have amounted to murder. * Section 149 of the IPC deals with the offense of rioting and provides that if an offense is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, or such as the members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object, every person who, at the time of the committing of that offense, is a member of the same assembly, is guilty of that offense.
Final Decision: The court dismissed both criminal appeals and upheld the trial court's judgment of conviction and sentence. The appellants were directed to surrender immediately before the trial court for serving the remaining part of their jail sentence.

JUDGMENT RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, J. : – This judgment shall govern disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 99/2010 filed by appellant-accused Umesh Singh against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22-12-2009 passed by Additional Judge to the Court of 6th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Bhind (MP) whereby he has been convicted under section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and further convicted under section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation. Criminal Appeal No. 37/2010 has been filed by appellant No. 1 accused Manoj Singh and three others against the same judgment of conviction and sentence whereby they have been convicted under section 302/149 IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and further convicted under section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI of one-one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each with default stipulation. Since both the criminal appeals have arisen from common judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial Court, therefore, we have heard both the criminal appeal together.

2. From the report dated 20-10-2021 received from the Police Station Raun, District Bhind, it appears that appellant No. 4 Bal Singh (in CRA No. 37/2010) has died on 24-4-2021, therefore, the appeal filed on behalf of appellant No. 4 Bal Singh stands dismissed as abated.

3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17-11-2006 at about 8:30 in the morning, complainant Rahul Singh (PW5), who is the resident of village Ahroli, District Bhind, came out from the shed of his house along with his brother (deceased) Raghvendra Singh. At that time, accused Umesh, who was having a gun, accused Upendra Singh and Manoj Singh, who were having lathi, accused Bal Singh and Yashpal alias Kallu, who were having axe, unanimously reached the house of complainant and caught hold of deceased Raghvendra Singh and took him away towards the field of one Suresh Singh. When complainant Rahul Singh tried to rescue his brother, the accused persons abused in filthy languages and also threatened to kill him. Thereafter, on hearing hue and cry of complainant Rahul Singh, his mother Smt. Vimlesh Devi (PW7) and nephew Shivkaran (PW3) came there. At that time, accused Umesh fired a gunshot at complainant Rahul Singh but it did not hit him. Due to fear, complainant Rahul and his mother Smt. Vimlesh Devi and nephew Shivkaran hidden themselves in the shed of house. All the accused persons took away deceased Raghvendra towards the field of one Suresh Singh and beaten him by means of axe and lathi and also threatened to kill his all family members. Thereafter, accused Umesh Singh fired a gunshot at deceased Raghvendra as a result of which, he ell down on the ground. Thereafter, all accused persons inflicted injuries on deceased Raghvendra by means of kicks and fists, axe and lathi as a result of which he died on the spot. Thereafter, all the accused persons fled away from place of occurrence. After the incident, the villages also reached the spot.

4. On the basis of information received from complainant Rahul Singh (PW5), Inspector L.P. Chanderiya (PW14) reached the spot and recorded Dehati Nalishi. On the basis of Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P17), an FIR (Ex. P14) was lodged. The dead body of deceased Raghvendra was sent for postmortem in which, the cause of death of deceased was homicidal in nature and excessive bleeding from gunshot injuries sustained by him. On lodging the Dehati Nalishi, criminal case was triggered and set in motion. The investigating officer prepared spot map, seized blood-stained clothes as well as ordinary soil and blood stained soil, arrested the accused persons and seized the weapons from the accused persons as per their memorandum.

5. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet under sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149, 201 IPC and section 25/27 of the Arms Act was filed before the Court of JMFC, Lahar,