The trial companyrt after careful scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence on record companyvicted the appellants under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo various terms of sentences.
After undergoing the said sentence, Peera Singh and others came out of jail.
While the assault was going on, a Matador was passing by the road.
Ram Kanya PW 1 gave a signal to the driver of the Matador to stop which in fact stopped.
Present Honble Mr. Justice M.M. Punchhi Honble Mr. Justice S.P. Kurdukar Honble Mr. Justice M. Jagannadha Rao M. Singh, Kirpal Singh, M.A. Krishna Moorthy, Advs.
for the appellants.
It is this judgment of the High Court which is the subject matter of challenge in these criminal appeals.
A 1 and A 3 were armed with axes.
The High Court companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence of the appellants but, however, acquitted Bali Ram A 7 of all the charges.
In addition to this evidence, prosecution examined panch witnesses to prove the sport panchanama as well as various recoveries of the incriminating articles at the instance of the appellants under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Uma Nath Singh, Adv.
It was alleged by the prosecution that Bhagirath and his companypanions were waiting for an opportunity to take revenge on Peera Singh and ultimately on 7th August, 1984 at about 4.00 p.m., the appellants and two other accused persons picked up quarrel with Peera Singh when he was returning on a bicycle with his wife Ram Kanya PW 1 from Hatod to his village Kalmer.
Goverdhan PW 2 , Ram Singh PW 3 and Hari Dass PW 4 were the occupants of the Matador and were examined to prove the presence of Ram Kanya PW 1 at the scene of occurrence and running away of the accused from the place of incident.
All the accused pleaded that they are incident and they be acquitted.
This was a cause for enmity between them.
Shanker Singh A 2 obstructed Peera Singh near village Kankad and thereafter Kamal Singh A 1 , Mangi Lal A 4 and Deokaran A 6 who were hiding at a short distance reached the place of assault with weapons in their hands.
The cause of death as mentioned by Dr. Kochar was due to excessive haemorrhage and shock on account of incision carotid vessels and jugular veins.
In the meantime, A 7 appeared on the scene of occurrence with lathi and knife.
Peera Singh and his wife anticipating danger to their lives started running towards the field of Bhagirath.
According to them, they have been falsely implicated due to enmity.
for the Respondent The following Judgment of the Court was delivered J U D G M E N T P. KURDUKAR, J These two criminal appeals by special leave are filed by A 1 to A 4 and A 6 against a companymon judgment dated July 30, 1992 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench at Indore.
The appellants denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
The prosecution in support of its case mainly relied upon the ocular account of incident given by Ram Kanya PW 1 .
All the appellants under the impugned order stood companyvicted for an offence punishable under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code for which they were sentenced to suffer two years rigorous imprisonment and imprisonment for life respectively.
Dr. Kochar PW 5 , Medical Officer held the autopsy on the dead body of Peera Singh on 8th August, 1984 and found as many as 14 incised injuries on the dead body.
Ram Kanya PW 1 then requested the occupants of the Matador to help her in carrying the injured to the police stating at Hatod.
The appellants finding that some persons had arrived at the scene of occurrence, fled away.
While carrying the injured Peera Singh to the police station at Hatod, he died on the way before they reached the police station.
A 6 was armed with farsi.
In the meantime, the investigating officer carried out the investigation and after companypleting the same, as stated earlier, seven accused persons were put up for trial for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code.
the cause of death was testified to be excessive haemorrhage and shock due to cutting of carotid vessels and jugular veins.
Bhagirath A 5 died during the pendency of trial and hence, trial abated against him.
Bali Ram A 7 was acquitted of all the charges by the High Court.
At the outset, it may be stated that there is numberserious challenge to the fact that Peera Singh met with a homicidal death.
Peera Singh since deceased was the resident of village Kalmer in district Indore M.P .
The appellants along with Bhagirath A 5 and Bali Ram A 7 were tried for an offence punishable under Sections 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code for companymitting the murder of Peera Singh.
Dr. Kochar PW 5 who performed the autopsy on the dead body of Peera Singh had found as many as 14 incised injuries.
As a result of this assault, Bhagirath sustained serious injuries on his leg which was ultimately required to be amputated.
For that crime, all three accused persons were tried and companyvicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and each one of them was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years.
Goverdhan PW 2 , Rameshwar, Sunder PW 8 and Hari Dass PW 4 who were the occupants of the said Matador got down therefrom.
A 1 and A 2 took up the plea of alibi and in support thereof they examined Moti Lal DW 1 and Ganga Ram DW 2 .
All the appellants chased them and after overpowering Peera Singh, he was dropped on the ground in the field of Bhagirath.
The statement of Ram Kanya PW 1 was recorded by the Station House Officer on 7th August, 1984 at 6.00 p.m. After registering the FIR of Ram Kanya PW 1 at about 6.00 p.m., the dead body of Peera Singh was sent to the Primary Health Centre, Hatod.
Ram Kanya PW 1 tried to intervene and requested them to spare her husband but appellants did number pay any heed to her request but on the companytrary they assaulted Ram Kanya PW 1 .
A 5 since deceased exhorted the appellants to chop off the head of Peera Singh.
Agg ieved by the order of companyviction and sentence passed by the trial companyrt, the appellants and Bhagirath preferred two sets of criminal appeals to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Jabalpur.
Peera Singh suspected that his first wife was abducted by Bhagirath A 5 since dead which led to the incident of assault on Bhagirath by Peera Singh and his two associates, namely, Amba Ram and Hari Das.
Dr. N. Kochar PW 5 was examined to prove the post mortem examination report Ex.6 .
