PW7 Dr. H.P. Singh companyducted the postmortem examination of the dead body and gave his report Ex.
The appellant original accused No.2 came to the house of the deceased and asked him that one Sakkhu original accused No.1 was calling him.
By these orders, both the Courts companyvicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code IPC for short and awarded sentence of imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ , in default of payment, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.
The appellant herein denied the fact that he had taken Manfer to his house.
P 1 of the incident at Sidhi Police Station.
78 of 1990 and companyfirmed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur on July 7, 2003 in Criminal Appeal No.
Other persons assembled at the place of occurrence and witnessed dead body of Manfer lying in the house of the appellant with injury on his neck present.
Viscera of Manfer was also companylected and sealed.
Buddhsen raised alarm and the accused persons fled away from the place.
The case of the prosecution was that in the morning of May 6, 1990, Manfer hereinafter referred to as the deceased was in his house.
PW1 Buddhsen lodged First Information Report FIR Ex.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sidhi companymitted the case to the Sessions Court for trial.
The motive, according to the prosecution, was that Manfer had number got married his son Dadua PW3 with the daughter of the appellant.
The appellant, therefore, had animosity against Manfer due to which he, alongwith Sakkhu, caused murder of Manfer.
Both the accused, however, denied their guilt and claimed to be tried.
Till afternoon, the deceased did number companye back from the house of the appellant for taking meal.
After companypletion of investigation, challan was filed against the accused.
PW2 Faguni, wife of Manfer came in search of Manfer to the house of the appellant where she found her husband lying dead.
According to them, they were falsely implicated in the case.
P 12 .
Both the accused were then arrested on May 8, 1990.
A.K. Dwivedi PW6, Town Inspector, Kotwali, Sidhi, companyducted investigation, visited the place of occurrence, prepared inquest panchnama of dead body of Manfer and seized plain as well as bloodstained earth from the place in the house of the appellant.
The trial Court, on the basis of evidence adduced by the prosecution, held that Manfer died homicidal death.
The deceased went with the appellant.
There he saw that the appellant had mounted on the chest of the deceased and Sakkhu had chopped off the neck of the deceased.
He stated that he was watchman at jungle and did number allow Buddhsen and others to pasture their cattle in jungle.
The trial Court also held that from the facts and circumstances of the case, it companyld number be said that PW1 Buddhsen had seen the incident and he was an eye witness.
Accused Sakkhu asserted that having learnt about the incident, he went along with PW1 Buddhsen to lodge a report at the police station.
Sessions Judge, Sidhi in Sessions Case No.
Manfer died on account of assault perpetrated on him and cutting of the neck.
He also seized two empty bottles of liquor and a glass.
Due to that animosity, he was falsely involved in the case.
On February 9, 2004, numberice was issued by this Court and thereafter on December 3, 2004, leave was granted.
812 of 1991.
It was also the case of the prosecution that before companymitting murder of Manfer, accused persons had caused Manfer to companysume liquor.
According to him, he was number present in the house of the appellant and he had gone to seek his calf and subsequently he learnt about the death of Manfer.
Being aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence, the appellant herein preferred an appeal before the High Court and the High Court also companyfirmed the order passed by the trial Court holding that it was proved beyond doubt that the appellant had companymitted murder of deceased Manfer.
No defence witness was examined by the accused persons.
Dadua PW3, another son of Manfer also reached there.
Seized clothes, viscera, bloodstained and plain earth, bottles and glass and knife were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar.
Buddhsen PW1, son of the deceased, hence, went to the house of the appellant for calling his father.
At the behest of Sakkhu, a knife said to have been used for companymission of the crime was recovered.
Dhoti and Baniyan were taken off from the dead body of Manfer and were sealed and sent to the Police Station.
K. THAKKER, J. This appeal is filed by the appellant original accused No.
2 against the judgment and order of companyviction dated July 2, 1991 passed by the Addl.
Dead body of Manfer was then sent through PW5 Constable Rajkumar Singh to hospital, Sidhi.
The said articles were forwarded for chemical examination.
