Pratap Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This appeal has been filed against judgment dated 13.08.2008 passed in Sessions Trial No.197/2007 by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh

convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of

Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer further RI for six months.

2- The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 11.08.2007 appellant alongwith other members of picnic party went to for picnic at Bhadbhada Ghat at

Bebas river in village Ladai Bamhori. While appellant alongwith other members was taking bath in the river, it is alleged that appellant started

annoying Bihari by insisting him to take bath in the river. Naresh opposed this act of the appellant as Bihari seemed to be insane. In furtherance

thereof, appellant brought a country made pistol (Katta) from his bag and fired on Naresh. As as result, Naresh died on the spot. Thereafter, the

appellant threw the dead body in the river. Sachin who was one of the members of picnic party, informed Mohanlal, uncle of Naresh, about the

incident. On getting this information, Mohanlal informed the police on telephone, whereon, police reached at the place of occurrence. Merg as well as

Dehati Nalishi was registered. Articles were seized from the spot and the body was sent for post mortem.

3- Accused-appellant abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. The trial Court proceeded against the accused-appellant. After trial, the trial Court

convicted the appellant as mentioned here-in-above. 4- Appellant has assailed the judgment of conviction on the ground that the appellant has been

falsely implicated in the case. It is contended that the weapon used in the incident was not seized from the possession of the appellant and there are

contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses.

5- On the other hand, learned Government Advocate has supported the impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal of the instant appeal.

6- PW-4 Dr.K.L.Adarsh has conducted post mortem of the deceased Naresh. He found following injuries :

“1. 1/4 x 1/4 cms abrasions, 14 in numbers found on the lower side of the face. Skin with abrasions was black in colour. Injuries were simple in

nature.

There was gun shot 2 ½ x 1 cms inside the right side of the mouth and right side of the lip. Skin was black and skin was sweltered. Muscles inside

the mouth on the right side were ruptured. Right Maxilla and right Mandible and both incisor teeth and both the canine teeth in the right upper jaw

were fracture. Pellets were embedded in the mouth cavity and a green cog was present inside the mouth. Plenty of blood was filled in the mouth

cavity.â€​

7- Doctor opined that both the injuries were ante mortem in nature and caused by fire arm. Injury No.2 was grievous in nature which caused death of

the deceased. It is clear by the testimony of Dr.K.L.Adarsh (PW4) that death of Naresh was due to fire arm injury and was homicidal in nature.Â

8- Now the next question is how the deceased Naresh died by gun shot injury. In this regard testimony of eye-witnesses Jai Kumar (PW6) and

Lakhan Patel (PW7) is important. Both the witnesses have stated that they had gone with the deceased Naresh Patel, Bihari Sen, Bhagirath Patel,

Sachin Patel, Bihari Patel, Lakhan Raikwar, Lakhan Patel, Umesh Raikwar, Dharmendra Lodhi and Arvind Lodhi for a picnic at Hanuman Toria,

nearby Bebas river in village Ladai Bamhori. At around 12:00-1:00 PM they went for bath in the river. Bihari Sen was sitting there. Bihari Patel,

Sachin Patel and Bhagirath Patel did not go for bath instead they stayed at Hanuman Mandir to look after the belongings and other articles which

were brought for picnic. Both the witnesses have also stated that Babu Basore, Pannalal and Pratap Son of Baijnath Lodhi were also there. Near the

Ghat accused-appellant Pratap S/o Baijnath Lodhi was taking bath in the river. At that time, Bihari Sen came there. Bihari seemed to be insane.

Appellant started annoying Bihari by insisting him to take bath in the river. Naresh opposed this act of the appellant. In furtherance thereof, appellant

brought a Katta from his bag and fired on Naresh which hit in his mouth. As a result, Naresh died on the spot. Then the accused fled from the spot.

9- Dharmendra PW1 is also the eye-witness who has supported the prosecution story by stating that Pratap has fired at deceased Naresh in his mouth

and after fire he fled away from the spot. It is important to mention here that Dharmendra PW1 was not crossexamined on the same day instead after

taking adjournment he was cross-examined by the defence counsel on the next date of hearing on which he turned hostile but looking to his statement

in the examination in chief that statement cannot be washed out looking to the facts of the case.

10- Soon after the incident, Jaikumar (PW6) and Lakhan Patel (PW7), who are the eye-witness before whom appellant has fired at the deceased-

Naresh narrated the whole incident to other members of the picnic party.

11- Sachin Patel (PW-2) and Arvind (PW-8) who have been examined by the prosecution did not go to the Ghat for bath instead they were looking

after the belongings and other articles which were brought for picnic. Both these witnesses have stated that appellantPratap has fired at Naresh. This

incident was narrated by Sachin to Mohanlal Kurmi (PW8), who is the uncle of the deceased Naresh about the fact that the appellant has killed the

deceased and after killing his body is drowned in the river. On getting this information from Sachin, witness Mohanlal PW8 went to police station

Batiagarh where information was given by him to the police on which merg was registered which is Ex.P/8 and Dehati Nalsi was registered vide

Ex.P/9.

12- PW9-S.P.Mishra (ASI) has conducted priliminary inquiry and investigation in the case. He has deposed that on 11.08.2007, Mohanlal lodged an

FIR regarding murder of deceased Naresh which was registered as Ex.P/9 and on the information merg Ex.P/8 was also registered. He prepared

Panchnama of the dead body for which notice Ex.P/10 was issued to the witnesses and before witnesses Panchnama was prepared which is Ex.P/11.

On the same day site map Ex.P/13 was prepared before the witnesses-Mohanlal and Narayan. He also seized 23 pellets and one plastic cog vide

seizure memo Ex.P/15. Further, investigation was conducted by PW13 B.S.Pandey (SI).

13- Mohanlal PW8 has corroborated testimony of S.P.Mishra (ASI) PW9. He has deposed that for preparation of Panchnama of dead body notice

Ex.P/10 was issued to him and after that Panchnama of the dead body was prepared which is Ex.P/11 before him and also one country made pistol

(Katta) alongwith one empty cartridge of 12 bore and one mobile was seized vide Ex.P/12 from the spot and also map of the place of occurrence

Ex.P/13 was prepared before him.

14- PW13 B.S.Pandey (SI) who has conducted further investigation in this case has deposed that after getting case diary, case vide crime No.226/07

under Section 302/34 of IPC was registered. On the same day, statement of Dharmendra and Sachin was recorded. He sent dead body for post

mortem. He has seized 12 bore country made pistol (Katta) with one empty cartridge vide seizure memo Ex.P/12 which was left at the spot by the

accusedappellant. He has also seized from the spot full pant and chappal. Seizure memo Ex.P/16 was prepared for the same. He has also seized full

pant, one shirt, one baniyan blue in colour, and one towel, yellow in colour and one mobile of Nokia belonging to the accusedappellant on the spot vide

seizure memo Ex.P/21. He has further deposed that vide Ex.P/26 he has sent the articles to FSL, Sagar for examination. FSL report Ex.P/27 has been

produced. In the Court, he has identified country made pistol (Katta) and other articles which were seized on the spot by him.

15- So, going through the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution in this case, we are of the opinion that the death of deceased Naresh was

caused by the accused-appellant from Katta, is proved beyond reasonable doubt. We, therefore, in view of the above, do not find any merit in the

instant appeal, hence, we dismiss the appeal and confirm the conviction under Section 302 of IPC and sentence awarded by the trial Court to the

appellant.

Appeal dismissed.