4 and 7 who claimed to be eye witnesses, one Jaswant Singh PW 8 was also examined to substantiate the claim that an oral dying declaration was made by the deceased before the said witness implicating the accused persons to be his assailants.
Several circumstances were highlighted to attach vulnerability to the prosecution version.
Four persons i.e. respondents herein faced trial for allegedly causing homicidal death of Dharamchand hereinafter referred to as the deceased on 6.8.1984.
Post mortem was companyducted and large number of injuries were found on his body.
During investigation the alleged weapons of the assailants were seized.
One of the circumstances was alleged manipulation of the FIR to indicate as if the same was lodged at 10.25 a.m. The evidence of PWs.
The accused persons were hiding behind bushes on the road near village Gharola.
His numbere was cut.
During trial accused persons pleaded innocence.
At this juncture it is to be numbered that ten witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version.
Apart from PWs.
The two witnesses rushed to the police station where PW 4 lodged the FIR Exhibit P 10 .
After investigation charge sheet was placed.
They were armed with lathies and farsies.
In view of the afore noted alleged discrepancies, the accused persons were held to be number guilty and the order of acquittal was passed by allowing the appeal.
Though knife was stated to have been found at the spot, thee was numberinvestigation directed to find out as to how it came there at the spot of occurrence.
Accused Bhanwar Singh was companyvicted for offence punishable under Section 323 IPC, accused Bheru Singh also similar companyvicted, and each of them were sentenced to undergo six months RI for the offence.
When the deceased and the aforesaid two persons reached near the Khakhra, the respondents surrounded them and started attacking the deceased with weapons with which they were armed.
4, 7 and 8 were also subjected to criticism on the ground that they did number inspire companyfidence.
4 and 7 tried to intervene, but they were also attacked by the accused persons as a result of which they also received injuries.
The Trial Court accepted the prosecution version and companyvicted the accused appellants and sentenced them as numbered supra.
The deceased in injured companydition was taken to the hospital, and later he succumbed to the injuries.
The matter was carried in appeal by the accused persons.
His presence companyld number have been numbered by PW 4 who lodged FIR and, therefore, number mention of his name in the FIR is the natural companysequence.
Arijit Pasayat, J. Questioning acquittal of the respondents by the impugned judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench at Indore, by which the companyviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam, were set aside, this appeal has been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Background facts as highlighted by the prosecution version sans unnecessary details are as follows On the fateful day at about 9.30 a.m. deceased accompanied by Mansingh PW 4 and Gulabsingh PW 7 was going from his village Talod to Alote.
