SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3549

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

    AT INDORE

    BEFORE

    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA

    &

    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)

    CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1313 of 2010

    BETWEEN:-

    GOKUL S/O RAMESH GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,

    1. OCCUPATION: STUDENT, R/O 94/3 SHIIVKANTH NAGAR, P.S.

    BANGANGA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    ASHISH S/O RAMESH GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

    2. OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O 94/3 SHIIVKANTH NAGAR, P.S.

    BANGANGA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    AHILYABAI W/O RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

    3. OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O 94/3 SHIIVKANTH NAGAR, P.S.

    BANGANGA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    RAMESH S/O HEERALAL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

    4. OCCUPATION: SERVICE R/O 94/3 SHIIVKANTH NAGAR, P.S.

    BANGANGA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    RAVI S/O RAMESH GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

    5. OCCUPATION: DRIVER R/O 94/3 SHIIVKANTH NAGAR, P.S.

    BANGANGA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    .....APPELLANT

    (BY MS. SHARMILA SHARMA, ADVOCATE)

    AND

    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH GOVT. THROUGH POLICE

    STATION BANGANGA INDROE (MADHYA PRADESH)

    .....RESPONDENT

    ( BY KAMAL KUMAR TIWARI, GOVRENMENT ADVOCATE)

    JUSTICE VIVEK

    RUSIA

    ''Reserved on : 22.11.2022'' ''Pronounced on : 15 .12.2022''

Advocates:
As.Rathore,S.K.Meena/,A.G.

    J U D G M E N T

    This criminal appeal has been preferred by convict accused-appellants against judgment dated 31.08.2010 of learned 16th Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Indore, in Sessions Case No.818/2009, whereby they have been convicted for offence under section 148, 302/149, 307/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo, 1 Year R.I., Life Imprisonment, 7 Years R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-, Rs. 1000/- and Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, they were ordered to additionally undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month, six months and 1 month.

[2] It is admitted fact that the appellant No.3 and appellant No.4 are husband and wife and appellant No.1, 2 and 5 are their son. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant No.4 had died.

    Facts of the case in short, are as under:

[3] Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P/1) was registered at the instance of Bhagwanti Bai at Crime No. 0/2009 for the offence punishable under section 307,302, 34 of IPC on 22.02.2009 at 12.30 pm in respect of incident took place on 22.02.2009 at a 10.30 pm. Thereafter upon the death of Rajubai, merg intimation was recorded under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, ASI Omkar Singh Kushwaha , Police Station Banganga registered an FIR at Crime No.148/2009 at 15:20 against all these five appellants. As per the information given by Bhagwanti Bai (PW-1), she purchased two plots alongwith Ahiliya Bai (Appellant No.3) in

Shantinagar Colony. Ahiliya Bai demanded money for one plot from Bhagwantibai and she gave Rs.50,000/- and requested to Ahilyabai to execute a notarized documents but she refused to do so, hence, a dispute occurred between them. According to PW-1 on 22.02.2009 in the morning, she alongwith her mother Rajubai and brother Dilip were passing infront of the house of Ahilyabai (Appellant No.3), Gokul (Appellant No.1), Ashish (Appellant No.2), Ravi (Appellant No.5), Ahiliyabai and Ramesh (Appellant No.4) surrounded them with common intention to kill in furtherance and attacked on them with intention to kill with knife, Gupti and Katar. She has further disclosed that Ravi was carrying the Katar, Gokul, Ashish and Ramesh were wielding knife and Ahiliya Bai was wielding Gupti. They assaulted them due to which she sustained injury on her wrist, her brother Dilip sustained injury on his back and thigh, cheek and her mother Rajubai sustained the injuries on stomach, chest and back and ran away. All three injured went M.Y. Hospital for treatment but mother Rajubai died on reaching the hospital. This incident witnessed by Phool Singh, Tejram and other residents.

[4] The dead body was sent for postmortem, where the autopsy was conducted by Dr. N.M. Unda (PW-12). Other two i.e. Bhagwanti Bai and Dilip were examined by Dr. Indira Narang (PW-16). As per autopsy report the death was due to shock hemorrhage as a result of injury to the body. The death is homicidal in nature. These appellants were arrested and from their possession arms were recovered. All were sent to the doctor with request to give query report thereafter these arms and blood stain cloth, blood stain soil were sent to FSL. The statement of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. were recorded. Investigation was completed and charge sheet was filed. The trial was committed to the Sessions Court. The appellants denied the charges and plead for trial.

[5] During trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 17 documents. In defence the appellants did not examine but cross examined witnesses i.e. PW-1 and PW-2 and PW-3 at length. On completion of recording of evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, to which they strongly denied the allegations brought against them by the prosecution and claimed for trial.

[6] After hearing the arguments of both sides and on going through the evidences and materials available on record, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that Bhagwanti and Dilip sustained the injury by sharp cutting edged weapons. Raju Bai died due to

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          whatsapp-icon Back to top