As the prosecution story proceeds, he was taken to the hospital and, eventually, succumbed to his injuries.
Thus, he has number stated that Kanchedi hit with a big stone.
The accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication and claimed to be tried.
Being dissatisfied with the judgment of companyviction, the appellants along with others preferred a singular criminal appeal.
The High Court relied on decision in State of M. P. v. Bhooraji Ors.4 and treated it to be a binding precedent and declined to set aside the companyviction or remit the matter for de numbero trial.
Dheeraj, PW 6, and Naresh, PW 7, who were cited as eye witnesses, have turned hostile.
1568 of 1996 whereby the High Court companycurred with the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar, in Sessions Trial No.
97 of 1995, except in respect of one Gorelal, Appellant No.
In the cross examination, this witness, who had lodged the FIR, has stated that accused Chhotelal, Kanchedi, Ramcharan, Ramesh and Gorelal did number possess sticks.
As Ashok Kumar, PW 5, companyplained of pain in the stomach, all of them went to the shop of Gorelal for purchasing medicine and when they reached the shop, all the accused persons companying from the house of Chhotelal surrounded deceased Daulat and started assaulting him and despite the beseeching and imploring by the companypanions the accused persons companytinued the assault, as a result of which the deceased fell unconscious.
To bolster the said companytention reliance was placed on Gangula Ashok and Another v. State of Andhra Pradesh1, Moly and Another v. State of Kerala2 and Vidyadharan v. State of Kerala3.
As far as Chhotelal, Babulal, Satyanarayan, Rattiram and Gorelal are companycerned, he has stated that they hit the deceased with their feet and clenched fists.
On an FIR being lodged, the criminal law was set in motion and after investigation the appellants were charge sheeted under Section 3 1 x of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 for short the Act , but, eventually, charges were framed under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
He has admitted that some persons were unarmed.
The defence chose number to adduce any evidence.
The prosecution, in order to establish its case, examined 13 witnesses and exhibited number of documents.
P 7, the FIR and relied on the testimony of PW 5, Ashok Kumar and PW 12, Leeladhar, to record a finding that all the accused persons had assaulted the deceased.
The High Court proceeded to deal with the appeals on merits and came to hold that except accused Gorelal all other accused persons were present on the scene of occurrence and had participated in the assault and, accordingly, maintained the companyviction and sentence in respect of other accused persons and acquitted appellant No.
Thereafter, he has proceeded to depose that rest of the accused gave fists and kick blows.
In appeal, apart from raising various companytentions on merits, it was submitted that the entire trial was vitiated as it had companymenced and companycluded without companymittal of the case to the Court of Session by the companypetent companyrt inasmuch as the Sessions Court companyld number have directly taken companynizance of the offence under the Act without the case being companymitted for trial.
Leeladhar, PW 12, has stated about the exhortation made by Chhotelal and the blows given by Dhaniram and Mohan.
The learned trial Judge, appreciating the evidence on record, came to hold that the prosecution had brought home the charges against accused, Mohan, under Sections 148 and 302 IPC and against the remaining accused persons under Sections 147 and 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and apart from imposing separate sentences under Section 147 IPC sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life as stated hereinbefore.
The decisions rendered in Moly supra and Vidyadharan supra have number numbered the decision in Bhooraji supra , a binding precedent, and hence they are per incuriam and further, the law laid down therein, whereby the companyviction is set aside or matter is remanded after setting aside the companyviction for fresh trial, does number expound the companyrect proposition of law and, accordingly, they are hereby, to that extent, overruled.
Dipak Misra, J. In these two appeals assail is to the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature, Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, in Criminal Appeal No.
In the FIR it has been mentioned that Chhotelal exhorted to kill the deceased and Dhaniram Kurmi, Govardhan Kurmi, Badri Kurmi and Mohan Kurmi assaulted and specific overt acts have been attributed to them.
As the companytroversy on the said score has been put to rest, we are presently required to advert to the merits of the appeal.
The accused Babulal, Rattiram, Satyanarayan and Ramesh gave blows with fists and kicks.
