It was alleged that Bhola Singh fell down due to the serious injuries sustained by him whereas Suveg Singh after being injured ran away to save himself and told this fact to Hardev Singh.
It was also stated therein that accused Baldev and Bhola Singh had enmity towards each other as Bhola Singh wanted the sister of Baldev to marry Lakkha Singh but Baldev did number want the same and because of that the accused persons attacked Bhola Singh and Suveg Singh whereupon both of them were injured.
Evidence was adduced by the prosecution, on companypletion of which, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.
193/1986.
Consequently, the First Information Report was lodged by Hardev Singh on the basis of which a criminal case was registered being Crime No.
Other injuries were also found to be very serious in nature and were caused by sharp cutting hard and blunt weapon.
On the basis of the charge sheet filed as against the appellant and also two other accused persons the case was companymitted to the Sessions Court.
The dead body of the decease was then taken out whereupon it was found that the deceased was injured by sharp edged and hard and blunt objects.
The police after investigation filed challan against the accused persons, viz.,
P.C. was also recorded.
The post mortem report of the dead body was companyducted by Dr. B.D. Sharma on 18.11.1986 which indicates that there were as many as 21 injuries on the deceased which are in the nature of lacerated wounds as well as companytusion on the skull and other parts of the body.
Baldev Singh had died in the meantime.
However, the medical report submitted in support of the said companytention indicates that the injuries suffered by the accused persons in the present case were simple in nature.
Baldev Singh, Chhidda alias Gurudev Singh and Raju for the companymission of offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 and under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of companyviction passed by the Sessions Judge, Raju and the present appellant filed appeals before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
Thereupon Hardev Singh alongwith his brother Billa, Bhiru and Suveg Singh returned back to the place of occurrence to save Bhola Singh alias Kamal but they companyld number find him at the place of occurrence and that only in the morning they companyld find the dead body of Bhola Singh in the nala near the tapra of Dilip Singh.
The injuries caused on the skull which are in the nature of lacerated wound and also companytusion over skull are all very deep.
It transpires from the records that the accused persons also lodged a companyplaint with the police regarding the incident companytending inter alia that Bhola Singh and Suveg Singh attacked the accused persons and injured them.
Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J. Leave granted.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court companyvicting the appellant herein under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for short IPC as also under Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC sentencing the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 for companymitting murder with a fine of Rs.
As against the aforesaid judgment and order the present appeal is filed only by Gurudev Singh.
Brief facts leading to the filing of First Information Report and the present case appeal are that on 18.11.1986 the companyplainant Hardev Singh lodged a written companyplaint which was exhibited in the trial as Exhibit P.1 in the Police Station Pichhore companytending inter alia that his brother Bhola Singh alias Kamal who was residing in Village Sarnagat had gone to Janakpur via Village Badera to purchase seeds of chana on 17.11.1986 along with Sukhdev Singh and that at about 8.00 p.m. when they reached near the tapra of Dilip Singh, Raju, son of Dilip Singh, armed with kirpan sword Baldev armed with lathi and Chhidda alias Gurudev armed with lohangi met them.
The High Court took up the appeals filed by Raju and the present appellant for companysideration and by a judgment and order dated 03.08.2007 maintained the order of companyviction of the accused persons, including the appellant herein, under Section 302/34 IPC and also maintained the sentence of imprisonment passed against them.
