Back
2018 Supreme(MP) 514
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
C.V. SIRPURKAR., AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Madhav & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of M.P. & Ors. - Respondents
CrA.No.727, 1323 of 2009
Decided On : 19-09-2018
For the Petitioners:Ms. Durgesh Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Geeta Yadav, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Shri N.S. Chouhan, learned Govt. Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on eyewitness testimony, medical evidence, and scientific reports to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
Conviction - Criminal Law - IPC Section 302, Section 34 - [Summary of Acts and Sections]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC for assaulting and causing the death of the deceased due to previous enmity. The prosecution presented eyewitness accounts and medical evidence to support the conviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court were justified and confirmed by the appellate court.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of eyewitness testimony, the nature of injuries, and the applicability of defenses such as private defense and mitigating circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the eyewitness accounts, medical evidence, and scientific reports to establish the guilt of the accused. It also emphasized that the mere relation of witnesses to the deceased does not automatically discredit their testimony.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellants were confirmed. The appellants were directed to surrender themselves for serving the remaining jail sentence.
AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. These two appeals arising out of S.T.No.297/2008 are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Criminal Appeal No.727/2009 has been filed at the instance of accused-Madhav, whereas, Criminal Appeal No.1323/2009 has been filed at the instance of accused persons namely Raju Yadav and Sahodra Bai against judgment dated 28.03.2009 passed in Sessions Trial No.297/2008 by First Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2500/- each and in default, further imprisonment for six months.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a report was lodged at Police Station Moti Nagar against the present appellants to the effect that on 13.05.2008 in the night at about 22:30, owing to some previous enmity with the deceased Pappu @ Nandkishore, the appellants, with intention to kill the deceased at Subedar Ward, near Puliya of Dubey Tal, Sagar, have assaulted the deceased with knife and lathi, as a result of which the deceased died. Co-accused Sahodra Bai took the deceased to Government Hospital. On being informed vide Ex.P-24, police reached at the spot. Police prepared Naksha Panchayatnama. Dehati Merg Intimation Ex.P-19 and Dehati Nalishi Ex.p-21 was prepared at the instance of co-accused Sahodra Bai. The dead body was sent for post-mortem whereon it was found that the cause of death was shock on account of excessive hemorrhage. On the basis of Merg Intimation Ex.P-19 and Dehati Nalishi Ex.P.-21 written at the instance of Sahodra Bai, Merg Intimation Ex.P-20 and FIR Ex.P-22 was registered against the .witnesses namely Rooiya and Kailash. During investigation it was found that the incident was caused actually by present appellant on 15.05.2008. All the accused persons were arrested. Knife and Lathi used in the crime were seized at the instance of accused persons and accused Raju was sent for medical examination. Seized articles were sent to FSL, Sagar for examination. In the FSL report, it was found that human blood was present on the seized articles. Charge-sheet was filed against the accused persons.
4. All the accused persons abjured their guilt and pleaded that due to political influence, they have been falsely implicated in the case by making Rooiya and Kailash as witnesses. Accused-Raju and Sahodrabai are brother and Bhabhi of the deceased, whereas, accused-Madhav is also near relative, therefore, they had no interest to kill the deceased.
5. The appellant has assailed the findings and conviction on the ground that the trial Court has committed error of fact and law by giving finding of conviction and sentence. It is submitted that there are contradiction and omissions in the prosecution witness statement. It is also submitted that due to political influence real culprits were left off and the appellants made accused in this case. It has been also argued that the prosecution story and the medical report do not support each other. All the witnesses are related to the deceased and naturally interested in this case, therefore, their testimony should not have been relied upon by the trial Court. Hence, the appellants should be acquitted.
6. Learned counsel for the State has argued that after murder of Pappu @ Nandkishore appellant Sahodra Bai has given false information to the police implicating prosecution witnesses which is an additional evidence regarding culpability of appellant. Learned counsel for the State has supported the impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal of the appeals since the trial Court on proper appreciation of evidence has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants.
7. This case is based on the eye witness account. In this case main eye-witness is Sapna Yadav PW9. Besides Sapna Yadav, some other witnesses are also the eye-witnesses such as Rahul Yadav PW4 and Rajesh Yadav PW5 who have also seen the occurrence. Now the first and foremost question is
