Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 14339
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
G. S. AHLUWALIA, VISHAL MISHRA, JJ
Babulal Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRA 87/2009
,Vk.Pandey,Advocate General
The court affirmed the conviction of the appellants for murder, establishing that they acted in furtherance of a common object, resulting in multiple injuries and death.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 148, 323, 325, 302 - Appeals against conviction and sentence - Conviction of appellants for multiple offences including life imprisonment for murder - Evidence established that appellants acted in furtherance of common object, causing multiple injuries to the complainant party, resulting in death - Acquittal of complainant party in cross-case indicates they were not aggressors - Conviction affirmed. (Paras 58-60)
(B) Evidence - Ocular evidence vs. medical evidence - Ocular testimony of injured witnesses holds primacy unless completely contradicted by medical evidence - Presence of injuries on witnesses corroborates their testimony. (Paras 28-30)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for their involvement in a violent incident on 17-3-2006, where they assaulted the complainant party, resulting in the death of Chhandu Yadav and injuries to others. The incident stemmed from a prior dispute regarding cattle damaging crops. (Paras 3-5)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the appellants acted with intent and knowledge, inflicting severe injuries on the complainant party, affirming the trial court's conviction and sentence. (Paras 55-59)
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of ocular evidence versus medical evidence and the nature of the incident (premeditated vs. sudden). (Paras 28-30, 55)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the appellants acted in furtherance of a common object, and the severity of injuries indicated intent to kill, justifying the life sentence. (Paras 55-58)
Result: Appeals dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice G.S. Ahluwalia By this common Judgment, Cr.A. No. 2642 of 2008 filed by Ravindra Yadav, Nathu Yadav, Indrapal Yadav, Goverdhan Pal and Ghooman Yadav and Cr.A. No. 87 of 2009 filed by Babulal shall be decided.
2. Both the appeals have been filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Judgment and Sentence dated 29-11-2008 passed by 6th Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Chhatarpur by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced for the following offences :
| S.No. Name | of Appellant | Offence under Section | Sentence |
| 1 | Ravindra | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. |
| 2 | Nathu (Died during pendency of appeal) | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. |
| 3 | Indrapal | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and |
| fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. | |||
| 4 | Goverdhan Pal | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. |
| 5 | Ghooman | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. |
| 6 | Babulal | 3 3 148 of IPC 323/149 of IPC (three counts) 25/149 of IPC 02/149 of IPC | 3 1 year R.I. 1 year R.I. years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 6 months R.I. |
All sentences to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution story in short is that on 17-3-2006 at about 11.45 P.M., the complainant Rakesh lodged a report alleging that 2 days prior to the date of incident i.e., 17-3-2006, Rakesh and his father were working in their field. At that time, the father of Ravindra scolded that their cattles cause damage to the crop. Father of Rakesh replied, that a panchayat may be summoned and whatever damage is caused by their cattles, will be compensated by him. It was replied by father of Ravindra that compensation would not be sufficient and his eyes would be taken out. On the next day, the mother of Ravindra declared that Mahabharat would take place. On 17-3-2006, when Rakesh was going to deliver food to his Baba Chhandu Yadav, then near the Beda of Pandey, Indrapal assaulted him on his back by means of lathi, which landed on his shoulder. On raising alarm, Indrapal called the other accused persons by using abusive language as a result, Babu Yadav with lathi, Ghooman Yadav with Ballam, Ravindra Yadav with axe, Goverdhan and Nathu with lathi came and instigated that he should not survive. On hearing his alarm, his Baba Chhandu Yadav, father Rajaram Yadav, Vir Singh, Shanker Singh who were in the field, came there in order to save him. Then the accused persons assaulted on the head of his father Rajaram. Ravindra gave two axe blows on the head of Rajaram, as a result Rajaram sat down by catching hold of his head and started shouting. Ghooman gave a ballam blow on the leg of Rajaram. His Baba laid down on Rajaram in order to save him. Then Nathu Yadav, Goverdhan Yadav started assaulting him by lathi whereas Ravindra assaulted on the head of his baba by axe. They caused multiple injuries to Rajaram and his Baba. His uncle Vir Singh, Shanker tried to intervene then they too were assaulted by the accused persons, as a result they too received multiple injuries. All of them were shouting. Gorelal, Suraj Yadav, his mother, Aunt and various other villagers intervened
