The case of the prosecution is that a day before the occurrence Prasadi Dusadh and Ganesh Dusadh killed a goat belonging to Baharan Bhagat PW 8 .
The injury was ante mortem and had been caused by a weapon like lathi.
On removing the skull the doctor numbericed large amount of blood and blood clots on the left side of the brain.
Some injuries were also caused to Ramashish.
The appellant gave a lathi blow on the head of Ramlal as a result of which the latter fell down and died at the spot.
The case relates to an occurrence which took place in village Khahla in district Saran at about 11 a.m. on August 14, 1965.
Sarju Prasad Singh recorded the statement of Ramashish and on the basis of that statement, a formal information report was prepared at the police station.
On the morning of August 14, 1965 Ramlal and his son Ramashish went to their paddy field.
Ramlal Bhagat, who was aged about 65 years, died as a result of the assault during the companyrse of the occurrence while his son Ramashish Prasad PW 10 received injuries.
Ramlal deceased Died instantaneously and as, such, there arose numberoccasion for giving a second blow to him.
As such, the appellant was companyvicted under section 302 Indian Penal Code.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 30, 1968 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The two companyrts below accepted the prosecution case that it was the appellant who had given a lathi blow on the head of Ramlal deceased as a result of which the latter died.
After that the accused fled away, SHO Sarju Prasad Singh of police station Barauli on receipt of information that a large number of persons belonging to the party of the accused had companylected to attack the other party in spite of the promulgation of an order under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, came to the place of occurrence but before that Ramlal had already been killed.
The remaining five accused were companyvicted under section 323 read with section 149 Indian Penal Code as well as for other minor offences with which we are number companycerned On appeal the Patna High Court maintained the companyviction and sentence of the appellant, while some modification was made as regards the sentence awarded to the other five companyvicted accused.
As the injury on the head was deliberate and number accidental and as the injury was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death, the case against the appellant would fall squarely within the ambit of clause 3rdly of section 300 Indian Penal Code.
No separate sentence was awarded to the appellant for the offence under section 147 Indian Penal Code.
under sections 302 and 147 Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on the former companynt.
539 of 1966.
Nur ud din Ahmed and U. P. Singh, for the appellant.
On dissection the doctor found 3 long fracture of the left parietal bone about 2 1/2 from the middle line of the top of the head.
One of the companypanions of the appellant then shouted that the assault was made because of Ramlal being responsible for the companymencement of criminal proceedings by Baharan.
It was held that the case against the appellant fell under clause 3rdly of section 300 of Indian Penal Code.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The blow on the head of Ramlal with lathi was plainly given with some force, and resulted in.
At the trial the plea of the appellant was that he had been falsely involved in the case at the instance of the Mukhia of the village who was inimical to the appellant.
Post mortem examination on the body of Ramlal deceased was performed by Dr. R. S. Singh on August 15, 1965.
It has also been found by the, High Court that there was numberaltercation or exchange of abuses between Ramlal and the accused party.
The appellant was companyvicted.
On the advice of Ramlal Bhagat deceased, Baharan Bhagat lodged a report with the police at 3 p.m. on that day.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Khanna, J. Gudar Dusadh appellant was tried along with 23 others in the companyrt of Additional Sessions Judge Saran.
94 of 1969.
Eighteen of the accused were acquitted by the trial companyrt.
The appellant thereupon came up in appeal to this Court by special leave.
C. Prasad, for the respondent.
The appellant along with his companypanions was lying in wait to attack Ramlal and, according to the evidence on record which has been accepted by the High Court, he gave a blow on the head of Ramlal as a result of which Ramlal fell down and died instantaneously.
While they were returning from the field at about 1 1 a.m. they were assaulted by the six companyvicted persons who had been hiding on the route.
Death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to companypression on the left side of the brain.
The doctor further stated that the above injury was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
The accused then set fire to one of their huts with a view to prepare some kind of defence.
