IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ.
Imrat v. The State of M. P.
Criminal Appeals No. 1250 of 1996 and 1313 of 1996 (Jabalpur): against the judgment and sentence dated 30.7.1996 passed by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No. 207 of 1994; Decided on 7.7.2025
(1) Evidence -- contradictions and omissions -- no substantial contradiction and omission in evidence of prosecution witnesses -- minor omissions and contradictions will not dislodge prosecution case -- only those omissions which affect merit of prosecution case and are material in substance can be said to be omission -- small omissions and contradictions may be due to different capacity to observe, to remember, due to passing of time and out of shock and fear. AIR 2012 SC 3539 and (2011) 6 SCC 279 followed. [Paras 14 & 15
(2) Witness -- related witness -- evidence of related witnesses cannot be discarded -- only, it has to be evaluated minutely -- related witness will be last persons to let real culprit go free and implicate an innocent person.(2009) 6 SCC 600, AIR 2011 SC 2336 and AIR 2011 SC 2552 followed. [Para 17
(3) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 302, 300 Excep. 4, 304 Pt. II, 323 and 34 -- quarrel started all of a sudden -- as per medical opinion, death could have been caused due to excessive bleeding from cut injury on head -- deceased aged about 60 years -- other injuries not fatal -- matter is covered u/s. 300 Exception 4 -- conviction altered from S. 302 and 302/34 to S. 304 Pt. II -- sentenced to 7 years’ RI -- punishment u/s. 323 maintained. [Paras 21 to 25
¼1½ lk{; && fojks/kkHkkl vkSj yksi && vfHk;kstui{k ds lkf{k;ksa ds lk{; esa lkjoku~ fojks/kkHkkl vkSj yksi ugha && xkS.k yksiksa vkSj fojks/kkHkklksa ls vfHk;kstu i{kdFku Mxex ugha gksxk && dsoy mUgha yksiksa dks yksi dgk tk ldrk gS ftuls vfHk;kstu i{kdFku dk xq.kkxq.k çHkkfor gksrk gS rFkk tks lkjoku~ :i ls rkfRod gSa && NksVs yksi vkSj fojks/kkHkkl /;ku nsus] Lej.k j[kus dh fHkUu&&fHkUu {kerk ds dkj.k] le; O;ixr gksus ds dkj.k rFkk vk?kkr vkSj Hk; ds dkj.k gks ldrs gSaA ,vkbvkj 2012 ,llh 3539 rFkk ¼2011½ 6 ,llhlh 279 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 14 ,oa 15
¼2½ lk{kh && ukrsnkj lk{kh && ukrsnkj lkf{k;ksa dk lk{; R;ä ugha fd;k tk ldrk && cl] bldk ewY;kadu lw{erk ls fd;k tkuk gksrk gS && ukrsnkj lk{kh okLrfod nks"kh dks tkus ns dj funksZ"k O;fä dks vkfyIr djus okys vafre O;fä gksaxsA ¼2009½ 6 ,llhlh 600] ,vkbvkj 2011 ,llh 2336 rFkk ,vkbvkj 2011 ,llh 2552 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 17
¼3½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 302] 300 viokn 4] 304 Hkkx 2] 323 rFkk 34 && >xM+k vpkud vkjaHk gqvk && fpfdRlh; jk; ds vuqlkj] e`R;q flj ij dVs ?kko ls vR;f/kd jälzko ds dkj.k gksuk ldrh Fkh && e`rd dh o; yxHkx 60 o"kZ Fkh && vU; {kfr;k¡ ?kkrd ugha && ekeyk /kkjk 300 viokn 4 ds v/khu vkrk gS && nks"kflf) /kkjk 302 vkSj 302@34 ls /kkjk 304 Hkkx 2 esa ifjofrZr && 7 o"kZ ds dfBu dkjkokl ls naMkfn"V && /kkjk 323 ds v/khu naM dk;e j[kk x;kA ¼iSjk 21 ls 25
JUDGMENT
Singh, J. -- 1. Both these criminal appeals (Cr.Nos.1250/1996 & 1313/1996) have arisen out of judgment of conviction dated 30.7.1996 passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.207/94 [State of M.P. v. Buddhu and three others], therefore, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. As per prosecution story, on 08.4.1993 at about 08.45 am the appellants/accused persons abused Nanku by hurling filthy words, and thereby, causing irritation and also committed murder of deceased-Nanku in public place near Panchayat Bhawan in village Karhaiya, P.S. Belkheda, District Jabalpur. In furtherance of common intention alongwith co-accused persons and in the same incident tried to commit murder of PW.1-Kandhilal and PW.2-Tattu. Therefore, accused persons were charged for offences under sections 294, 302, 307 r/w 34 (2 counts) of Indian Penal Code.
3. Admitted facts before the trial Court were that deceased-Nanku, PW.1-Kandhilal and PW.2-Tattu are real brothers. Kanta Bai (PW.3) is wife of Tattu (PW.2).
4. Prosecution story is that on 8.4.1993 at about 08.45 am deceased-Nanku took his buffaloes to have drinking water in front of government handpump situated near Panchayat Bahwan and he tried to dig a pit for the same purpose. Accused-Buddhu objected and said that this water is used by them for the purpose of preparation of bricks. Meanwhile, accused No.2 (Birju), accused No.3 (Munna) and accused No.4 (Imrat) also arrived at the spot. Appellant/accused (Buddhu) was having an axe and rest of the accused persons were having ‘lathi’ and ‘parena ’. All the accused persons thrashed Nanku. Accused-Buddhu gave axe blow on the head of Nanku and rest of the three accused persons gave ‘lathi’ blows. When PW.1-Kandhilal tried to intervene the accused persons also assaulted and caused injuries to him with lathi. The accused persons also assaulted and caused injuries to PW.2-Tattu who came to intervene. The incident was seen by PW-3/Kanta Bai, wife of Tattu. After accused went away, seriously injured Nanku was taken by PW.1-Kandhilal and PW.2-Tattu to the Police Station, Belkheda. There, Nanku lodged an F.I.R. (Exhibit-P/25). The Police Station, Belkheda registered the case and sent the injured persons Tattu and Kandhilal for medical examination to Belkheda Hospital where Assistant Surgeon H,M.Wadhwani (PW.4) examined Nanku, PW.1-Kandhilal & PW.2-Tattu. Their medical examination reports are Exhibits-P/8, 11 & 7 respectively. During treatment at Belkheda Hospital injured-Nanku expired at 12.45 pm, therefore, vide intimation (Exhibit-P/10) Dr.M.H.Wadhwani informed the Police Station, Belkheda who registered Merg vide Exhibit-P/24 and prepared ‘panchayatnama’ Exhibit-P/6. Dr.R.K.Mishra (PW.9) conducted postmortem of the body of deceased-Nanku and submitted post-mortem report (Exhibit-P/23), in which it is mentioned that cause of death of deceased-Nanku is due to injuries over vital parts head and spleen.
5. During investigation Police inspected the place of incident and collected blood soaked soil and normal soil and ‘panchnama’ (Exhibit-P/13) was prepared. Acccused-Buddhu was taken into custody and questioned and on his information memorandum (Exhibit-P/15) an axe was seized vide seizure memo (Exhibit-P/3). Similarly, on the information of accused-Birju memorandum (Exhibit-P/16) ‘lathi’ was seized vide seizure memo (Exhibit- P/4). On the memorandum of accused-Munna, Exhibit-P/14 ‘lathi’ was seized vide seizure memo Exhibit-P/1. On the memorandum of Accused- Imrat Exhibit-P/17, ‘lathi’ was seized from him vide seizure memo Exhibit-P/2. The seized soil from spot, arms and clothes of deceased were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination. Report received from there is Exhibit-P/27, according to which soil (article–A), clothes of deceased Kurta (article C-1) and Bandi (article C-2) have human blood. Similarly, ‘lathi’ (article–D) seized from accused-Birju, art
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.