On medical examination, it was found that they have sustained various injuries.
Heeralal fell down.
Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows On 10.11.1997 Gyan Singh hereinafter referred to as the deceased went to Ramkhilawans house for companylecting kanda eatable bulb .
On examination, he found nine injuries on the body of deceased and according to his opinion, the cause of death was syncope due to shock and external hemorrhage caused by multiple injuries.
On the memorandum statement of accused Kashi one club and one pharsa were recovered from the appellant and seized.
The learned companynsel for the respondent on the other hand supported the judgment of the trial Court.
Appellant who was carrying pharsa and Kashi a lathi started beating.
After post mortem examination, the clothes found on the body of the deceased were also companylected.
In the meantime, Beerbali, who is son of Ramkhilawan came there.
On the way, when they reached near the house of Kashi, Kashi started scolding Ramkhilawan, who was refrained from doing so.
The accused appellant pleaded innocence and false implication.
Kashi assaulted Ramkhilawan with a club.
The seized pharsa, clothes and earth were sent for chemical examination and on examination stained earth, pharsa and clothes of Gyan Singh were found to be stained with blood.
Dev Kumar assaulted him with a lathi on his head and also gave a blow on his left shoulder.
The leg was cut and turned into two pieces.
Both the documents were recorded by Arjun Ram, Assistant Sub Inspector, Head Constable Jagsai companyducted inquest, prepared report and forwarded the dead body of Gyan Singh for autopsy to Community Health Centre, Manendragarh.
Heeralal gave intimation and lodged First Information Report.
When he did number companye back till evening, his father Heeralal went in search of the deceased to the house of Ramkhilawan in the evening at around 7.00 p.m. Heeralal along with Ramkhilawan and his son Gyan Singh were returning to his house.
All the injuries found on the body of Gyan Singh were caused by hard and or sharp objects except one which was found to be abrasion and present below left knee.
Gyan Singh fell down, thereafter Radhe chopped his other leg and assaulted Gyan Singh with pharsa on his thigh and other parts of the body.
Dr. S.K. Chainpuria companyducted autopsy.
After companypletion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manendragarh, who companymitted the case to the Court of Sessions for trial.
He was also beaten by Radhe with pharsa.
The statements of witnesses were recorded.
Gyan Singh instantaneously died at the spot and others were injured.
Accused appellant and his associates Kashi and Dev Kumar fled away from the place of occurrence.
Heeralal came to rescue him.
The trial Court had found the appellant guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC but found the companyaccused, namely, Kashi and Dev Kumar to be number guilty.
The appellant was sentenced to undergo RI for life and fine with default stipulation.
From Dev kumar one club was seized.
He companylected blood stained and plain earth from the spot.
When Ramkhilawan intervened, he was assaulted by Dev Kumar.
Charges were framed against the appellant and companyaccused.
Appellant gave a pharsa blow on the leg of the deceased.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Before the High Court the main stand was that the assault, if any done by the appellant was in exercise of right of private defence and, therefore, companyviction was number called for.
Death was homicidal in nature.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant hereinafter referred to as the accused .
He prepared autopsy report and describing all the injuries found on the body of the deceased forwarded the report to the companycerned police station.
Injured Beerbali, Ramkhilawan and Heeralal were also sent for medical examination.
Challenge before the High Court was to the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh.
