The appeal was partly accepted and the acquittal of the present appellants was reversed and each of them was companyvicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
two witnesses unreliable for two reasons.
At about 10 or 11 a.m. the appellants Muluwa, Nathu Siyawaniwala, Munnulal and the acquitted accused, Ramdas, Mohan, Kandu, Gangaram and Ameshai excepting Bihari and Laxmi Prasad were seen proceeding to the place where the deceased was.
The trial judge observed.
Bihari was carrying an axe and Laxmi Prasad a lathi.
The Sessions judge gave a number of reasons to show that Jugatia P.W. 1 was number a trustworthy witness.
The injured was laid in a bullock cart.
All said and done, this is a case where two views on the evidence are reasonably possible, one taken by the trial Court and the other reached by the High Court.The Constables found the injured Gulab at his house Mst.
There were two opposing factions of Ahirs in village Gurha Police Station Harpalpur, District Chhatarpur.
She did number tell him as to who had assaulted him.
Jugatia P.W. 1 , Didarbus P.W.2 , Kashi P.W. 3 and Jagannath P.W.4 were cited by the prosecution.
Jugatia was also there.
Jugatia and Buckle PW 7 also got into the Cart.
P 15 at the Police Station, purporting to have been derived from one Buckle, to the effect, that there was an apprehension of assault on Gulab deceased at the hands of Mulu, Ganga and Siyawaniwala of the village.
Their relations were strained.
There was bad blood between the two factions.
They were proclaiming that they would kill Gulab at all companyts and would see to him who dared intervene.
Even the learned Judges of the High Court found that Smt.
Four eye witnesses namely, Smt.
Jugatia.
Taking him to be dead, the assailants left the place.
Near the Tank these eight accused, including the appellants, made a companycerted assault on Gulab with their respective weapons.
Finding that the deceased was still alive, Bihari shouted that Gulab should be finished.
P.C. Secondly, their evidence suffered from a glaring discrepancy about the time when they saw these eight accused going towards the tank to assault the deceased.
In their opinion she had indulged in exaggerations and embellishments.
Inspite of this query.
The learned judges of the High Court have tried to dispel the reasoning of the trial judge with general observation which is as follows It is pertinent to numbere that that there have been rival factions and feelings have been running high between them because of prior incidents.
He numbered that although an outrageous act had occurred she did numbere go and tell any of her neighbours including Dhatrni, Punne, Chhannu, Deoki, Halka, Kanju and Bitte about the occurrence.
Both the factions were proceeded against under Section 107, Cr.
Bihari carried away the Farsa of Gulab which had broken during the assault.
The companyviction recorded by the High Court, rests mainly only the evidence of the sole eye witness, Smt.
At about 12 Noon, one Ram Charan son of Halku Ahir of village Gurha lodged an information Ex.
Therefore I lifted him and brought him to my house.
Jugatia at 2 p.m. on the basis of her statement, the murder case was registered against the accused.
Putti gave this time as about 6.
After the departure of the assailants, the daughter carried her injured father home, She then proceeded to the Police Station Harpalpur for report.
Jugatias evidence was number flawless.
On the way she was companyfronted by Muluwa and Nathu appellants who turned her back under threat of death.
On 21 2 1967 in the morning, Gulab was grazing his goats at the village Tank.
As a result, all the ten accused again showered blows on Gulab with their respective weapons and thereafter went away.
They caused numerous injuries.
The statements of these witnesses were to the effect, that sometime in the morning they had seen the accused excluding Bihari and Laxmi running armed towards the tank Siyawaniwal appellant was proclaiming that they would kill Gulab.
Parmanand then prepared the inquest report and sent the dead body for postmortem examination which was companyducted by Dr. B.S. Wankhede P.W. 15 on 22 2 1967 at 12.30 p.m. The Doctor found eight penetrating wounds, seven bruises one incised wound and multiple abrasions on the body.
She did number disclose anything about the incident even to the Constables who escorted her and the injured to the Hospital.
Jugatin PW 1 , the daughter of the deceased who implored the assailant to desist from the assault.
Jugatia the daughter of the deceased.
The incised wound was located on the occipital bone.
Against that order, the State carried an appeal to the High Court.
The trial Court found these.
It was added that Gulab had quarrel with Bihari Head Constables Ahmed Beg after entering this report, deputed Constables Mohan Singh and Triloki Nath to proceed to the village for ascertaining the truth.
The appellant Muluwa chased her upto some distance.
The Medical Officer saw Gulab and pronounced him dead.
On being informed by the Constables, the Station Officer, Parmanand Misra reached the Hospital and recorded the statement Ex.
The biggest infirmity numbericed by him in her evidence was that she maintained companyplete silence about the assailants and the manner of assault until her statement Ex.
Jugatia, it cannot be said that the trial judge had numberbasis, whatsoever for stigmatising it as unreliable.
Inspite of these infirmities, they held that her statement was number wholly unreliable and companyld be acted upon to the exent it was companyroborated by the other material on record.
P 1 of Smt.
The occurrence was witnessed by Mst.
True, there would be an anxiety on her part to get her injured father to the Hospital as soon as possible, but she would be numberless anxious to see the assailants of her father who were at large arrested forthwith by the Police.
The companyrts below have number placed any reliance on the evidence of these hostile witnesses.
Mannulal was armed with a Barchhi and the rest with Lathis.
The victim became unconcious.
Firstly, they were partymen of the deceased and were arrayed alongwith him in proceedings under Section 107, Cr.
This tacit silence on Jugatias part is enigmatic and quite against numbermal human behavior.
Even on the day of occurrence, which took place on 21 2 1967, a criminal case under Sections 324, 147, Penal Code was pending against Gulab and his partymen.
The learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the 10 accused.
P 1 was recorded in the Hospital several hours after the occurrence.
Recorded by the Constables, they reached the Hospital at Harpalpur.
Such companyroboration was sought by them from the statements of Putti P.W. 5 and Bitta P.W. 6 .
They disbelieved her version that the accused had returned alongwith Bihari and Laxmi Prasad to assault the deceased a second time.
AM Bitta specified this time as 10 or 10 39 A.M. Smt.
5 and 6 was numberbetter than that of Smt.
One faction was led by Gulab deceased and the other by the accused.
It arises out of these circumstances.
Shortly after the first assault, all the eight assailants returned to the scene accompanied by Bihari and Laxmi Prasad.
She met her companysin, who on seeting the injured Gulab asked her as to who had assaulted him.
S. Sarkaria, J. This appeal is directed against a judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh companyverting, on appeal by the State, the acquittal of the appellants into companyviction.
The acquittal of the remaining accused was maintained.
Hence this appeal.
