Ghanshyam Yadav vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(MP) 916

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
G. S. Ahluwalia, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, JJ.
Ghanshyam Yadav & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 324, 483 of 2011
Decided On : 11-05-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Anoop Nigam, Advocate, C.P. Singh, Advocate

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 148, 302/149, 323/149 - Conviction and sentencing of appellants for murder and causing injuries - Appellants convicted for unlawful assembly and engaging in a violent attack leading to two deaths and injuries to several victims - All sentences directed to run concurrently. (Paras 2, 3, 5, 6, 57, 59)

(B) Culpable Homicide - Definition and elements - Nature of culpable homicide depends on intention or knowledge regarding consequences; mere presence in unlawful assembly does not impose liability without common object established. (Paras 6, 11-24)

Facts of the case:
Two deceased were attacked by a group of armed assailants, leading to their deaths and several injuries inflicted on their family members. The assault stemmed from a dispute over agricultural land. (Para 3)

Findings of Court:
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants collectively engaged in the unlawful assembly with a common object to attack and harm the victims. (Paras 57-58)

Issues: Whether deaths were homicidal, and whether the appellants acted with common object to commit injuries. (Paras 8, 58)

Ratio Decidendi: Knowledge of lethal danger and the fulfilment of elements of Sections 299 and 300 IPC support the convictions; culpable homicide is established by proving intention and nature of injuries inflicted. (Paras 11-24, 27-30)

Result: Appeals dismissed, conviction and sentence upheld.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5)
2. arguments presented by the parties (Para 6 , 7)
3. court's observations and reasoning (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57)
4. ratio decidendi of the case (Para 58 , 59)
5. final conclusion and order (Para 60)

JUDGMENT

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastav, J. - This common judgment shall also govern disposal of Criminal appeal No.483 of 2011 filed by appellant -arvind alias Lalla. Since the factual matrix in both the criminal appeals is same, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are heard simultaneously.

(2) Being dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29-03-2011 passed by Special Judge & additional Sessions Judge, Datia (MP) in Sessions Trial No.123 of 2006, both Criminal appeals under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred, by which appellants have been sentenced and convicted as under:-

Offence	Sentence
Section 148 of IPC	Two-two years rigorous imprisonment
Section 302/149 of IPC for commission of murder of deceased Sahab Singh and Ramswaroop	Rigorous Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-
Section 323 /149 of IPC (three counts) for causing injuries to injured Hakim Singh, afsar and Smt. avdeshbai	Six- six months rigorous imprisonment

all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. all the appellants were directed to pay Rs.10,000- Rs.10,000/- as compensation to legal representatives of deceased Sahab Singh and Ramswaroop.

(3) In brief, case of the prosecution is that on 11-09-2006, at around 11:45 am, complainant Hakim Singh (PW4) lodged a report at Police Station Dursada, District Datia with the allegation that on the said date, at around 08:30 in the morning, his uncle Sahab Singh had gone outside for attending the call of nature. accused Ghanshyam Yadav, Ramkishan, Bharat & Prakash armed with farsa, Vansingh armed with luhangi, Ramsewak, Ravindra, arvind, Narendra, Kallu and Chandan armed with lathi reached the agricultural field and hurled abuses and when his uncle Sahab Singh objected to it, all accused persons within intention to kill committed marpeet by their respective weapons with his uncle as a result of which, his uncle Sahab Singh sustained injuries on various parts of his body and blood started oozing. When he along with his father Ramswaroop, uncle afsar, aunt avdeshbai and grand-mother Prembai came there for rescue, all accused persons committed ''marpeet'' with them as a result of which, his father Ramswaroop sustained injuries on various parts of his body and blood started oozing, his uncle afsar sustained contusion injury on his head and his aunt Smt.avdeshbai sustained injuries on her head and blood started oozing after sustaining injuries on various parts of her body. His grand-mother Prembai also sustained contusion on her head. Complainant Hakim Singh also sustained injuries on his head and blood started oozing after sustaining injuries by him on the finger of his right hand and left leg. On the basis of aforesaid report lodged by complainant Hakim Singh, FIR was lodged at Crime No.72 of 2006 vide Ex.P9 for commission of offences under Sections 147 , 148, 149, 294, 323, 307 of IPC. The injured persons were sent for medical examination on the same day i.e. 11-09-2006. On the basis of merg intimation vide Ex.P14 and Ex.P48 of death of Ramswaroop and Sahab Singh, Merg Report No.405/2006 and Merg Report No.406/2006 were recorded separately. Postmortem of deceased Sahab Singh and Ramswaroop were conducted on 12-09-2006. Matter was investigated. Blood stained and plain soil were collected. accused were arrested. Deadly weapons i.e. farsa, lathi and luhangi were seized and th