As they reached the jungle area Godarvada Dehat five persons emerged from the interior and stopped the passengers.
Another person in the gang, who too had a gun.
When appellant was searched a silver todal an ornament was recovered.
According to the police version they got some information on 13.10.1988 about the clanestine movements of a person with a companyntry gun hovering around Bhilai Market.
Sunder Lal PW 8 accompanied by some others when to Dhooma Police Station and lodged a first information statement on the same evening 5.25 p.m. But the police, it appears, remained lethargic though they were kind enough to ambulance Sunder Lal to Jabalpur Medical College Hospi tal.
Sunder Lal dismounted from the horseback, but suddenly the gunman fired a shot at him which struck him on his loins resulting in the pellets perforat ing into his panis and perineum region and then the assailants snatched a bag companytaining jewellery from the victim, besides grabbing his wrist watch and the cash from him.
Both of them were arrested at the spot.
In the meanwhile the little boy Lakhi Ram managed to escape from the ken of the dacoits.
Sunder Lal PW 8 managed to stand up and genuflucted before the marauders.
He has filed this appeal by special leave.
Sessions Court companyvicted Ganpat and this appellant or Sector 396 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced them to death while the other three were acquitted.
When she began to cry, the armed man shot her dead and grabbed her ornaments.
For companysidering the aloresaid crucial point, we may set but, briefly, the facts On 11.10.1988, one Sunder Lal PW 8 was proceeding from his village Nagar Deori on horse back to Kercani Village Madhya Pradesh with a herd of pigs, his twelve year old son Lathi Ram PW 10 and twenty year old daughter Laxshmibai were also accompanying him on foot.
One of them revealed their identity as disciples of Gobind Das so saying he threatened him with the butt end of the gun on his chest, Sunder Lal PW 8 slumed down again.
Assistant Sub Inspector made a search of the person of Ganpat first and recovered a companyntry gun, five cartridges and some other articles including ornaments.
1996 Supp 10 SCR 375 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by THOMAS, J. The appellant was companyvicted of dacoity with murder and was .sentenced to death by the Sessions Court.
Both the companyrts found that the silver todal recovered from him belonged to Sunder Lal and was in his possession during ill fated journey destinated to Kerpani.
In this appeal, we would proceed on the basis of the fact companycluded by both companyrts that the silver todal was a stolen article and the same was found in the possession of appellant Netraj on 13.10.1988.
One of the five, who was armed with a gun, pointed the weapon on the chest of Sunder Lal PW 8 and demanded him to surrender all his money and jewellery.
After they left the scene with the booty Sunder Lal tottered up and with the help of his little son Lakhi Ram, mounted on his horse returned to his village leaving the companypse of his daughter Laxmi Bai lying inside the jungle.
The question which has narrowed down in this appeal.
Later police companyld trace out four other persons and they too were nabbed.
High Court of Madhya Pradesh acquitted appellant of the offences under Section 27 of the Arms Act and companyfirmed the companyviction under Section 396 I.P.C. High Court, however, reduced the sentence to life imprisonment as for both the companyvicted persons.
But one of the six accused remained absconding and hence the trial was held against the other five persons including the appellant.
After companypletion of investigation police chargesheeted six persons including the appellant and Ganpat for offences under Section 396 Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.
The only evidence against Netraj is that police recovered the silver todal from him or 13.10.1988.
demanded Laxmi Bai to surrender her Karghona an ornament .
On appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, the companyviction was upheld but the sen tence was reduced to imprisonment for life.
in the light of companycurrent findings on facts by the two companyrts, is whether a presumption companyld legally have been drawn against the appellant for dacoity and murder on the strength of his possessing one of the stolen article two days after the occurrence.
PW 15 Assistant Sub Inspector of Dhan gaur Police Station rushed to the places with a posse of police and found the appellant Netraj and one Ganpat being trussed up by the local people.
This appeal is only by Netraj and hence was need number refer to the evidence pertaining to Ganpat.
