http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 5

CASE NO.:

Appeal (crl.) 238-239 of 2004

PETITIONER:

State of Madhya Pradesh

RESPONDENT:

Dharkole @ Govind Singh & Ors.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/10/2004

BENCH:

ARIJIT PASAYAT & C.K.THAKKER

JUDGMENT:

J U D G M E N T

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

State of Madhya Pradesh calls in question legality of the

judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court,

at Jabalpur directing acquittal of the respondents (hereinafter

referred to as the ’accused’) on the ground that prosecution failed to

prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubts. Originally eight persons

faced trial. Out of them co-accused Sunita and Kapoor Singh were

acquitted. During the pendency of the trial one Ramkishore absconded.

Two others Bhoora and Jabar Singh had died during trial. Trial Court

convicted accused Komal Singh, Manni and Dharkole. During pendency of

the appeal before this Court, accused Komal has died and the appeal

stands abated so far as she is concerned. All the three accused were

convicted for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section

149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ’IPC’). Appellant

Manni was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 148 I.P.C.

while the other two have been convicted for an offence punishable under

Section 147 I.P.C. Each one of them has been sentenced to undergo

imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/-.for the offence

punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. Manni was

directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence

punishable under Section 148 I.P.C. while the other two with rigorous

imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 147.

Prosecution Version in a nutshell is as follows:

One Hamid Khan (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was

posted as a police constable in police station-Seodha. On the fateful

day i.e. on 13.10.1989 at around 7 o’clock in the evening an

information was received in the police station that one Manni and his

friends, who were wanted, were hiding in the house of one Mannu Teli.

The deceased accompanied by head-constable Dayaram went in their search

to the house of that Mannu Teli. At the house of Mannu Teli, his

daughter Sunita met the police party and quarreled with them. Later

on, on the same day at about 7.45 P.M. she provoked the present

respondents and four others viz., Bhure, Jabar Singh, Ramkishore and

Kapoor Singh by weeping before them and telling them that the deceased

had insulted her. They all conspired to kill the deceased on that very

day. Thereafter when the deceased Hamid Khan came to the betel shop of

one Santosh in Seodha itself, those persons excluding Kapoor Singh came

there in two batches of three each armed with sword, Gupti etc. After

reaching near the shop of said Santosh, accused Bhure caught hold of

the deceased and thereafter Jabbarsingh gave a blow by sword injuring

the deceased below his left ear. Then accused Manni inflicted an

injury below his right ear with a Gupti. As the deceased fell on

ground, Kapoor Singh asked others to kill him. Accused Dharkole picking

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 5

up a stone which was lying nearby; assaulted on the head of deceased.

Kapoor Singh warned all those present there not to utter a word.

Accused Komal thereafter kicked the deceased and all of them went away

from there. However, one Ashok Sindhi informed head-constable Dayaram,

who was on duty at that time at the Municipal House that some one has

beaten one constable near the shop of Santosh. On receiving this

information, head-constable Dayaram reached the spot and found the

deceased lying seriously wounded. Suspecting the hands of present

respondents and their friends in it because of the earlier attempt for

their arrest, he informed his officer at police station. The Officer-

in-charge of the police station thereafter rea