Bahadur Singh & Ors vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

1. These three appeals are preferred against the

common judgment dated 16.7.2009 passed by the

High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore in

Criminal Appeal Nos. 1288 of 2006, 1362 of 2006 and

1408 of 2006.

2. The appellants herein are five in number and

were charged along with ten other accused on the

allegation that they armed with deadly weapons indulged in rioting and in furtherance of their common

object committed the murder of Babulal and caused

simple injury to Bhanwar in Sessions case no.193 of

2005 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam,

Madhya Pradesh. The Trial Court acquitted two of the

accused persons and convicted the remaining thirteen

accused for the offence under Section 302 read with

Section 149 IPC and sentenced each of them to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a

fine of Rs.1000/- each in default to suffer three

months rigorous imprisonment each. It also convicted

them for offence under Section 148 IPC and sentenced

each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two

years. Challenging the conviction and sentence all the

convicted accused preferred six appeals. The High

Court confirmed the conviction and sentence of five

accused by dismissing their appeals and acquitted the

remaining eight accused by allowing their appeals.

Aggrieved by the confirmation of their conviction and sentence the said five accused have preferred the

present appeals.

3.The prosecution case in brief is stated thus:

PW7 Shanti Lal, deceased Babu Lal and Shiv

Narayan are brothers and on 7.8.2005 at 6.30 p.m.

they had gone to work in their field situated at a

distance from their village Dudhia. In the evening at

6.30 p.m. they along with their servant PW1 Bhanwar

while returning to their house Babu Lal was riding his

motorcycle and PW7 Shanti Lal, Shiv Narayan and

Bhanwar were following him on another motorcycle.

On the way motorcycle of Babu Lal went out of order

and he was trying to restart it, at that moment all the

accused armed with dharia, axe, sword, balam and

lathies surrounded Babu Lal and the accused persons

Aziz son of Wali Mohammad and Aziz son of Jan

Mohammad, Bahadur Singh, Madan and Dinesh

attacked Babu Lal by dharia. PW7 Shanti Lal and Shiv

Narayan tried to save Babu Lal but the accused threatened to attack them if they come near. Servant

PW1 Bhanwar proceeded towards Babu Lal and he was

assaulted by lathi by accused Chand Mohammad and

he ran away. All the accused fled towards village

Ranayara. PW7 Shanti Lal and Shiv Narayan went

near Babu Lal and found him dead. They returned to

the village and PW7 Shanti Lal went to Police Station

Aalot and lodged complaint at 7.20 p.m. PW17 Town

Inspector P.K. Sharma registered the case and Exh.P28

is the First Information Report. He took up the

investigation and went to occurrence place and

prepared Exh.29 Spot Map. He conducted inquest and

prepared Exh.P18 Inquest Report. He sent the body

for post-mortem. PW16 Dr. Prakash conducted

autopsy on the body at Civil Hospital, Aalot at 8.30

a.m. on 8.8.2005 and found 32 incised wounds and 3

abrasions on the body and expressed opinion that the

death has occurred due to shock and excessive

external haemorrhage due to injury to neck, vessels,

air passage and vital parts like brain, 12-18 hours prior to post-mortem. Exh.P38 is the Post Mortem

Report issued by him. PW16 Dr. Prakash also

examined PW1 Bhanwar and Exh.P46 is the MLC

Report issued by him.

4. PW17 Inspector Sharma arrested the accused

and on their disclosure statements he recovered the

weapons used in the occurrence. He also seized the

blood strained earth from the occurrence place, the

clothes of the deceased and other articles. He sent the

weapons with Exh.P43 query to Doctor for opinion and

obtained the same. He sent the seized articles to

Forensic Science Laboratory with Exh.P44 requisition.

He completed the investigation and filed the final

report against the accused.

5. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 17 and

marked documents to prove the charges. The defence

examined DW1 on their side. The Trial Court

acquitted two of the accused and convicted the

remaining thirteen accused and sentenced them as

stated earlier. The High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on five accused by

dismissing their appeals and acquitted the remaining

eight accused by allowing their appeals. Challenging

their conviction and sentence the five accused have

preferred these appeals.

6. The learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellants contended that PW7 Shanti Lal could not

have witnessed the occurrence and his presence in the

occurrence place is doubtful and his conduct in not

going to rescue of the deceased is not natural and no

reliance can be placed on his testimony and the First

Information Report has been brought into existence by

putting ante dated and the presence of some of the

accused has been doubted by the High Court and that

would affect this substratum of the prosecution case

and the conviction and the sentence imposed on the

appellants are liable to be set aside. Per contra, the

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State

contended that the deceased and PW7 Shanti Lal went

to their agricultural field on the occurrence day and in the evening while returning to their house on

motorcycles the appellants armed with deadly weapons

surrounded Babu Lal and attacked him and due to

their threat PW7 Shanti Lal could not go near and his

presence in the occurrence place cannot be doubted

and the complaint was also lodged by him at police

station within one hour after the occurrence and all

the appellants had taken part in the brutal attack

made on the deceased and the conviction and the

sentence imposed on them is sustainable.

7. The prosecution case is that the appellants in

furtherance of their common object committed the

murder of Babu Lal by attacking him with dharia, axe

and sword. The prosecution examined PW7 Shanti Lal

as having witnessed the occurrence. PW7 Shanti Lal

is the younger brother of Babu Lal and he has testified

that on 7.8.2005 he, his brother Babu Lal and Shiv

Narayan along with their servant Bhanwar were

coming back from the agricultural field at about 6.30

p.m. and his brother Babu Lal was proceeding alone on his motorcycle and he, Shiv Narayan and servant

Bhanwar were coming behind him on another

motorcycle and the motorcycle of Babu Lal got stopped

all of a sudden and he was trying to get it restarted

and at that moment all the appellants holding axe,

dharia and sword emerged from the adjoining field and

attacked Babu Lal indiscriminately with their weapons

and they also threatened him and others not to come

forward lest they would also be killed and servant

Bhanwar moved forward and he was assaulted and he

ran away and after the attack the appellants fled

towards Ranayara village. It is the further testimony

of PW7 Shanti Lal that they went near and found

Babu Lal lying dead in pool of blood and they went to

their house in the village and then he went to police

station, Aalot on motorcycle and lodged complaint at

7.20 p.m. and PW17 Inspector P.K. Sharma registered

the case in Exh.P28 the First Information Report.

8. It is not in dispute that Babu Lal and his

brothers were jointly cultivating the land situated at a distance from their village Dudhia. The contention of

the learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellants is that PW7 Shanti Lal was residing in

Aalot and was not in the company of the deceased on

the occurrence day and he could not have witnessed

the occurrence. In the cross-examination PW7 Shanti

Lal has specifically stated that he has a Kirana shop

and a house at Aalot and he used to come to Aalot in

morning and return to village in the evening and

whenever there was work in the agricultural field, he

used to stay in the village. On the date of occurrence

all the three brothers along with their servant

Bhanwar went to their field for spraying pesticides

and while they were returning home in the evening,

the occurrence had taken place. The testimony of

PW7 Shanti Lal that he stayed back in the village on

the occurrence day on account of agricultural work is

natural and cannot be doubted.

9. Babu Lal was intercepted and attacked by

the appellants armed with deadly weapons and on seeing the same, PW7 Shanti Lal and Shiv Narayan

shouted at them and they were threatened not to come

near lest they would also be killed and on account of

fear they did not attempt to rescue Babu Lal at the

time of occurrence. In fact, they also witnessed the

attack made by the assailants on servant Bhanwar and

in such circumstances, the conduct of PW7 Shanti Lal

in not going near his brother Babu Lal during the

occurrence due to fear is quite natural and the

contention raised by the appellants cannot be

accepted. The other contention that non examination

of Shiv Narayan affects the prosecution case is also

devoid of merit. PW7 Shanti Lal withstood the lengthy

cross-examination and nothing could be elicited to

discredit his testimony. We are satisfied that the

testimony of PW7 Shanti Lal is natural, trustworthy

and credible and has rightly been relied on by the

Courts below.

10. The occurrence took place at 6.30p.m. on

7.8.2005 and PW7 Shanti Lal lodged the complaint at 7.20 p.m. in Police Station, Aalot. According to

Investigation Officer PW17 P.K. Sharma the copy of

F.I.R. could not be sent in the night and it was

despatched next day to the Court. The High Court

held that in the totality of the circumstances of the

case there was no inordinate delay in sending the

F.I.R. to the Court. We concur with the view of the

High Court.

11. Babu Lal died of homicidal violence is evident

from the medical evidence adduced by the prosecution.

The autopsy was conducted by PW16 Dr. Prakash and

according to him there were 32 incised wounds and 3

abrasions on the body and the death has occurred due

to shock and excessive external haemorrhage due to

injury to neck, vessels, air passage and vital parts like

brain. Exh.P38 is the Post Mortem Report issued by

him. It is clear that Babu Lal suffered a violent death

on account of multiple injuries.

12. The appellants on their arrest gave information

which led to the recovery of weapons used by them during the occurrence. PW2 Rameshwar, PW5 Pare

Singh and PW6 Jagdish have testified that the

appellants in their presence gave individual

information and took and produced the weapons from

the hidden place and they came to be recovered by the

investigation officer. The said weapons were shown to

PW16 Dr. Prakash and he has also expressed opinion

that the injuries found on the dead body could have

been caused by those weapons.

13. There was also motive for the occurrence.

There was a bomb explosion on the day of Holika

Dahan which led to the arrest of the accused, who is

also one of the accused in the present case and they

were having grudge that at the instance of Babu Lal

they were implicated in the said case. Besides the

above there was enmity on account of election to

Shikshak Palak Sangh and meeting of Nirman Samiti

in the village which culminated in the present

occurrence.

14. The High Court after careful and close scrutiny

of the evidence entertained doubt with regard to the

participation of eight of the accused on account of

absence of overt act attributable to them and gave

them benefit of doubt and acquitted them. The ocular

testimony of PW7 Shanti Lal about the attack made by

the appellants herein on Babu Lal is corroborated by

the medical evidence and the recovery of weapons

pursuant to the information furnished by them. In our

considered view the conviction and sentence imposed

on the appellants does not call for any interference.

15. There are no merits in the appeals and the

same are dismissed.

…………………………….J. (Jagdish Singh Khehar)

……………………………J. (C. Nagappan) New Delhi;

June 3, 2014 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Criminal Appeal No(s). 1095-1097/2011 BAHADUR SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF M.P. Respondents(s)

Date : 03/06/2014 These appeals were called on for Judgment today.

For Appellant(s) Ms. Manjeet Chawla,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. C.D. Singh,AOR(NP)

Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Nagappan pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar and His Lordship.

For the reasons recorded in the Non-Reportable Judgment, which is placed on the file, the appeals are dismissed.

(PRAVEEN KUMAR CHAWLA) (PHOOLAN WATI ARORA) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR