The parties are related to each other.
They intended to bring it back without informing the appellant.
Appellant and his companyaccused named Harbhajan Singh refused to part with it.
They had been bringing back the same quietly.
When he resisted, the appellant is said to have assaulted him with bake and Harbhajan Singh assaulted him by luhangi.
A First Information Report was registered round about 10.30 a.m. Both the accused persons were put on trial upon companypletion of the investigation.
Upon companysideration of the deposition of the witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution, the appellant and the said Harbhajan Singh were companyvicted under Sections 302/34 and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
She fell on his body.
She was pulled up by her hair.
Both the Trial Judge as also the High Court in arriving at their respective findings relied upon the testimony of the companyplainant PW 1.
Before the learned Trial Judge, the appellant and Harbhajan Singh pleaded number guilty.
486 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP Crl.
Appellant borrowed the same for carrying fodder.
An information in that behalf was received by the officer in charge of the companycerned police station.
The incident took place at about 8 a.m. in the morning.
They made an attempt to snatch the bull from the deceased.
He did number return it.
She started crying.
The deceased requested his mother Kanto Bai PW 1 to get the same whereupon both the deceased and PW 1 went to the hut of accused persons.
PW 1 intervened and tried to save her son.
The High Court by reason of the impugned judgment, while upholding the companyviction of the appellant, found the said Harbhajan Singh guilty only under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to the period already undergone by him.
Appellant and the said Harbhajan Singh carrying bake and luhangi respectively came behind them to the field of Ajit Singh.
The deceased Avtar Singh died on the spot.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
459 of 1998 whereby and whereunder a judgment of companyviction and sentence passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Dabhra District dated 20.07.1998 under Section 302/34 and Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code was affirmed.
They found their bull grazing.
4004 of 2006 B. SINHA, J Delay companydoned.
Sole appellant is before us questioning the companyrectness of a judgment of the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.
Complainant Kanto Bai PW 1 had a bull.
Avtar Singh deceased son of PW 1 went to the hut of the accused persons to take it back on 27.06.1995.
Leave granted.
The police officer came to the spot, took the statement of PW 1.
