Kotwal vs State of Madhya Pradesh

K. Jayachandra Reddy, J.—The sole appellant (original accused No. 6) was tried alongwith 17 others for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 324/149 I.P.C. The trial court convicted all of them for the said offences. On appeal the High Court acquitted them of the murder charge and convicted them u/s 324 I.P.C. The appellant was, however, found guilty u/s 304 Part II I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years. Hence the present appeal.

According to the prosecution, the deceased Udiya purchased agricultural land at Village Mavasiya from A-14. A-14 alongwith his associates committed theft of the cotton crop. The deceased reported to the police. Because of this there was enmity. On 20.5.82 P.W.3 son of the deceased and P.Ws. 6 and 7 alongwith their servant P.W.5 were cultivating some land different from the one in dispute. The deceased alongwith his minor daughter P.W.4 reached there with water. After some time all the accused armed with bows and arrows reached the place and encircled them. It is further alleged that the appellant and few other accused armed with bows and arrows shot at the deceased with arrows. An arrow shot by the appellant hit the deceased on the chest who fell down. It is further alleged that the appellant took up a piece of stone and struck on the head of the deceased. Thereafter the accused left. The injured deceased was taken home from the field and airport was given to the police. The deceased died and the post-mortem was conducted on his dead body and the Doctor found that there were six punctured wounds and one lacerated wound on the left parietal region which proved fatal. There were a number of the eye-witnesses and the plea of the accused has been one of denial. Suggestions, however, were made to the prosecution witnesses indicating that the deceased also shot arrows on some of the accused.

The medical evidence establishes beyond all reasonable doubt that the deceased died due to homicidal violence. The nearest kith and kin of the deceased who were present at the scene of occurrence have been cited as eye-witnesses. So far as the part played by the appellant is concerned, the evidence of the eye-witnesses is consistent. The High Court, however, held on the basis of the injuries found on the four accused persons that there was a free fight and that the prosecution has suppressed the origin of the occurrence. Having held that it was a free fight, the High Court, however, convicted the accused for their individual acts. So far as the appellant is concerned, the High Court relied on the evidence of P.W.3 who deposed that it was the appellant who caused the lacerated injury on the head by throwing a stone. As a matter of fact this evidence finds corroboration from the medical evidence. Even in the F.I.R., it was mentioned that it was the appellant who threw the stone on the head of the deceased as a result of which the brain matter came out. The High Court has given good reasons for convicting the appellant u/s 304 Part II I.P.C. and sentenced awarded also is not excessive. Therefore the appeal is dismissed. The appellant who is on bail shall surrender and serve out the remaining period of sentence.