village Chowkidar when the said Chowkidar was also present when the report was made in the police station.
Dhanuwa was found to be dead on the spot due to injuries caused to him.
On January 30, 1979 the Police arrested all the four accused and they were interrogated.
287 of 1979 after setting aside the order of companyviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, dated September 1, 1979, in Sessions Trial No.
According to the doctor, Dhanuwa had died as a result of the said injuries particularly due to the aforesaid head injury injury No.
There was a lacerated wound on the left side of the head of the deceased which was numbered as injury No.
287 of 1979 before the Jabalpur Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging their companyvicted and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
The High Court had also drawn adverse inference against uV prosecution case for number examining the.
The widow of the deceased, Imaratibai, and the son of the deceased, Radhey Lai, deposed about the companymission of the said crime and they stated that the accused persons had murdered the deceased Dhanuwa.
On seeing the Police, they left the dead body and fled away and thereafter disappeared in the jungle.
There was a Maddiya belonging to the accused Pyare Raja which is also close to the house of the deceased Dhanuwa and near a flour mill of Pran Singh.
This appeal is directed against the order of acquittal dated March 23, 1981 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench in Criminal Appeal No.
It is also alleged that Pyare Raja first dealt with a lathi blow at the back of the deceased and as result of such blow, the deceased fell down.
The village Constable, Jagdev, also stated in his deposition that on being informed by Radhey Lal, he rushed to the spot where the alleged incident had taken place and he found that all the four accused persons were carrying the dead body of Dhanuwa, the deceased.
A report of the incident was lodged by Radhey Lai to the Police Station and the crime case under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was registered and investigation was taken up.
On January 24, 1979, shortly before the said incident of murder, the accused Pyare Raja had given a slap to Imaratibai, the widow of the deceased Dhanuwa over some altercation.
The spot map was prepared and the inquest of the dead body was held and the body of the said Dhanuwa was sent for post mortem examination and blood stained earth and blood stained piece of stone from the spot were seized and seizure of blood stained1 plastic shoes was also made.
Sometime before the incident of murder when the accused persons had been assaulting a bus driver, Razaaq, the deceased Dhanuwa had intervened and the said Dhanuwa was also beaten by the accused persons.
The accused appellants thereafter preferred Criminal Appeal No.
The accused persons particularly the accused Pyare Raja also wanted to drive out Dhanuwa from the village altogether.
As a result of such injury, the parietal bone was reduced into pieces and the brain was damaged and the brain matter had companye out.
The High Court was of the view that the first information report was number without suspicion and improvements had been made in the prosecution case to suit the prosecution case.
P.W.I, Radhey Lai, went to call the village Constable and when the village Constable Jagdev PW3 rushed to the spot, the Constable also found the accused persons carrying the dead body of the deceased and seeing the police they left the dead body and fled away.
The High Court accepted the finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that it was a case of murder but since the two eyewitnesses were close relations of the deceased, namely, the son and the widow, and numberindependent eye witness was examined although according to the prosecution, some of villagers had also witnessed the said incident of murder, the High Court inter alia held that, in the absence of companyroboration by independent witnesses, the companyplicity of the accused companyld number be established companyvincingly particularly when there was companytradiction in the depositions of the eye witnesses.
On the basis of statements made by the said accused persons, the pharsa, and the lathi excepting one were recovered from the place where the same were companycealed.
Accordingly, the companyviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge was set aside by the High, Court and all the accused persons were acquitted.
The accused Pyare Raja, Veerendra Singh and Sawai Diwan were armed with lathis and Vijay Singh was armed with a pharsa.
It is in evidence that seeing his father being assaulted by the accused persons.
Thereafter, all the accused persons started assaulting the deceased with lathis and pbarsa.
The High Court also did number intend to place reliance on the deposition of the eye witnesses in view of the fact that P.W. 2 widow of the deceased had stated that only two pharsa blows had been inflicted on the deceased but from the medical evidence it transpired that six incised wounds were caused by pharsa.
The son of the deceased Radhey Lal PW 1 having seen the accused persons assaulting his father rushed to call the village companystables and the companystable Jagdev PW 3 while companying to rescue the deceased had found that the accused persons were taking the body of Dhanuwa but seeing the companystables left the body and disappeared in the nearby jungle.
Dr. R.S. Dhengula had performed the post mortem examination on the dead body of Dhanuwa on January 25, 1979 and six incised wounds on the right knee, leg and on the left parietal bone were numbered by the doctor.
The prosecution case in short is that the accused persons and the deceased, Dhanuwa, were number having good relations for some days prior to the incident of murder.
The State of Madhya Pradesh thereafter made an application for leave before this Court to assail the decision of the High Court and this Court granted leave.
It is the case of the prosecution that when the deceased Dhanuwa returned from village Kheda at about 2.30 P.M. on January 24, 1979, the accused persons were lying in wait for the said Dhanuwa in the Maddiya and the accused persons assaulted him.
The said two witnesses were natural witnesses and simply because they were close relations of the deceased, there was numberoccasion to discard their evidences as unreliable.
Thereafter, Imaratibai had returned to her house and was sitting in front of this door.
There were also swelling and companytusions on the right hand, right and left shoulders, on the hip and on left hand and an abrasion on the left knee.
It was also found that the tibia bone was cut and the radius and ulna of both the hands were fractured.
