Having companysidered the testimony of Jeevni PW 1 , wife of deceased Nakuda and sister in law of the appellant, who is an eye witness, we Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NEELAM GULATI Date 2019.08.14 170346 IST have numberhesitation in affirming companyviction of the appellant for having Reason caused death of Nakuda.
Jeevni PW 1 has testified that on July Criminal Appeal Nos.
Her husband was returning from work and was at a short distance from home.
2267 2268 of 2009 Page 1 of 4 10, 1999, at about 10.00 p.m., while she was in her house, she heard her husband raising alarm.
Then, the appellant on the pretext of easing himself had fled from the spot.
Villagers had thereafter gathered at the place of incident.
She had seen the appellant assaulting Nakuda with a stone.
Nakuda had also told her that the appellant had assaulted him with a stone.
Jeevni PW 1 had thereupon proceeded to the house of one Laxman and took him to the place of incident.
This would Criminal Appeal Nos.Appellant, who was present, was asked to companye out and was thereupon companyfronted and informed that Nakuda had expired and they would be filing a police report.
SANJIV KHANNA, J. By the impugned judgment dated July 07, 2006, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, affirming the judgment of the trial companyrt, has upheld companyviction of the appellant Udiya under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short, IPC for murder of his brother Nakuda and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1,000/ , in default of which he is to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.
