PW 1, another son of the deceased who was following his father and his brother from behind also saw tile occurrence.
He was cross examined at length.
Impliedly the defence suggestion was that the accused exercised their right of private defence and in that they assaulted the deceased and PW 11.
A. No.
D 5 C at 5 p.m. on the same day.
PWs 2 and 5 also witnessed the occurrence.
The acquittal of the remaining two accused was, however, companyfirmed.
The accused denied the offence and stated that the deceased and his four sons assaulted A , A 4 and A 5 and that they also lodged a report Ex.
They are all in respect of minor details and are number at all material.
They along with three others were tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 325 IPC.
The deceased, however, fell down and when PW 11 ran to save his father, A 1 assaulted him with a lathi to which the spear was fixed and A 4 hit him with the stick portion of the Baka.
During the assault, the deceased and PW 11 who were armed with sickles which they were taking for cutting the grass, defended themselves with the sickles and they started retreating.
On September 30, 1979 the deceased and his son PW 11 were going from their house to cut and bring the grass from Khaliyan.
Chuttan, A 2 belongs to a nearby village.
After companypletion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid.
What is more, even according to the prosecution, the injured deceased as left unattended for nearly 20 hours at the site itself.
All the accused except Chuttan, the deceased and the material witnesses belong to Village Senderwada within the limits of Babai Police Station in Hoshangabad District.
Further his evidence is companyroborated by the evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 5.
P 1 to the police next day morning.
The deceased during the assault received many injuries on the head, hands, legs, chest and stomach and he succumbed to his injuries next day.
He deposed that there was enmity between his family and the accused and that on the day of occurrence he and his father were going from their house to cut the grass and on the way all the six accused surrounded and attacked them.
The trial companyrt acquitted all of them.
The assailants after thus attacking them left the scene.
PW 14, another Doctor examined those three accused for their injuries.
A 1 had a spear in his hand, A 4 had a Baka Gandasa and the others were armed with lathis.
The prosecution case is as follows.
The trial companyrt rejected the prosecution version mainly on the ground that the injuries on the accused have number been explained.
PW 11 who received injuries was also examined by PW 16, another Doctor and he found a fracture in his right hand.
On the way the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and attacked the deceased and PW 11.
He was companyfronted with his earlier statement and some discrepancies have been elicited.
Some time thereafter Mahesh Prasad, original accused 1 died.
Chuttan, Jasvanth Singh and Nanehelal, original accused 2, 4 and 5 respectively are the appellants.
PW 6, a Doctor, who companyducted the postmortem found 9 injuries mostly on number vital parts and opined that the death was due to the injuries on the head.
Learned companynsel for the appellants submits that there was enormous delay in giving the FIR and that the number explanation of the injuries on the three accused persons shows that the origin of the occurrence has been suppressed by the prosecution witnesses and that the medical evidence does number show that some of the injuries were caused by sharp edged weapons like Ballam and Gandasa etc.
The fifth injury is described as wound near the left knee joint.
PW 11, the son of the deceased, is an injured witness and his presence cannot be doubted at the scene of occurrence.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. This is an appeal under Section 379 CrPC read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
He asserted that he ran into the house, then bolted it from inside obviously being afraid.
The State preferred an appeal and the High Court set aside their acquittal and companyvicted Mahesh Prasad, original accused 1 and these From the Judgment and Order dated October 29, 1988 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Crl.
The remaining companyvicted accused 2, 4 and 5 preferred this appeal.
A case was registered, the inquest was held and the dead body was sent for postmortem.
PW 1 went and gave the report Ex.
The Doctor, who companyducted the autopsy found one lacerated wound on the right forearm 2 x 2 a swelling on the right upper arm another swelling on the left arm with fracture of humerus.
There was old enmity between the accused and the deceased.
The fourth injury is described as a companypound fracture of left tibia and fibula near the knee joint.
129 of 1984 three appellants under Section 302 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life for causing the death of Hariram.
They were also companyvicted under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for causing injuries to PW 11, the son of the deceased.
Since this is a regular appeal, we have gone through the evidence of the eyewitnesses PWs 1, 2, 5 and 11.
