CRA/49/1996 of Keekram Vs Through Government Police on 12 August 1996

|oei

ee, RO esCoesELSESea.a

a. ||:are4-me Meob~or hetSeGagle Sangh ¢ Cree"eeANAld etgere wig nogo gaageSES OPSmealmaing|ae|.o ay@appTs||reaeca,| SARA SS STd, athe oT.*mgreBe|oe|g oo,Tto BRT Tage————— aye yatta io a BRT Tage————— aye yatta io a Tage————— aye yatta io a aye yatta io a yatta io a io a aa_eeey ae4aae“ee|nn:.|SoBSPraT Tee: rs ATA T ¥ _:7eeoo7aBASF||:poeARE PRY GPR———RTE== Ba | EFF HB Bay 7812-7 417heAcotsPer saa[te][ arte.][ et][ deg][ Pe][ aoe][ er][ cater]2aa|FETS& RTF OTe 0 23171993 Paty Pee soe joeg5 |‘ne1 glaa eax arate argae ¥ ata gtya acat Baaas| aRDRM OIE OTErice?|es - Be to BRT Tage————— aye yatta io a BRT Tage————— aye yatta io a Tage————— aye yatta io a aye yatta io a yatta io a io a a he - .

|

e+

am

ee

»w

i

\

'PRADESH AT J'ABALWR

HIGHCOURTOF WXDHYA

Vs.state o£M.P.

Kheek Ram

(CriminalAppealNo.'49/95)

Dateof Order

/Z/s/1996

‘

‘u

:

yRESENT

HON[']BLE SHRIJUST ICE S . K . KULSHRESTHA

Shri‘0.P.Singhfortheappellant‘shri‘R.K.Khare,(LA.forthestate.

TheAppellantKheekRam a haspreferred[this]appealagainst hisconvictionforanoffence u/s304PartIIof theI.P.C.andsentenceof5yearsrigorousimprisonment thereunderawarded byjudgment,dated 3.12.95 in SessionstrialNo.231/1993passed[by]the learnedAdditionalSessionsJudge,Mahasumand.

2. Theappellantwasprosecuted[along][ with]six8others soy:offences u/s147,148,307/149,b;92/149on'a.m.theallegation thaton12.3.93atabout10inMadhuban,theappellantalong with thesaid co-accusedhad £ormedan unlawfulassembly which hadarmeditselfpith deadly Weapons witha view to use criminalforcesagainstNaRul»,KamalabaiandBaijnath.It wasfurtherthe caseo£prosecution[that]in pursuanceoftheacomonobject or thisassembly,theseaccused personsonaccountofsomepreViousdisputes has proceeded[to]the£ieldofIshwar Prasadand hadassualted Nakul with thesticks(Lathi).Theprosecution[furthereallege&]that when hearing[the]alarm raiseé by[Nakul,]hisWife Kamalabaa.and son Baignath rushed[to]save hm,they were belabo-xred[by][ the]accused personsw1th theresult theyd1=o sustainedinjuries.The reportoftheincident waslodged by Met.Kamala be;atPollceStationBaspaand offence was,registeredatthe PoliceStation u/s[-302,'307,_read][ with][ section]34of theI.P.C.

3‘Theappellantalongwithotheracc’il'sed wereafrested by[tne]Policeenditis alleged thatweaponswere seizedattheinstanceof these[accused]persons.Theappellantwasthus triedalong With thesaidco-accusedfortheaforesaidoffences.

4. Thelearnec trialcourton considerationofthe evidenceadduced by theprosecution[came]to thestartedconclusion[that][ initially the]grappling[has]between thepresentappellantanddeceased[Nakul]and theotheraccused W weret attracted[to]the sceneof,uthe occurenceon hearing thecommotion.:Ia't waslaterthat theseaccused hadalsoengaged in the quarrelwhich included[involvement]of Kamala baiand Baijnathfroai thesideof the complainant.Thelearned Judge,xtherefore,held thatthe accused‘had[not]formed[any]u‘nlawfulassembly and thereforenegatived the[contention]a9oi: then prosecution'insofarasthe committingofoffences[u/s]147and148oftheIPC.wasconcerned,toThelearnedtrialcourt thereafter proceededthenatureof theactofthexindividualeconSider£rom amongst.theaccused persons.[Om][ finding]participants*re ached achedby the thelearned[trial]court[that]itwasacase[where]

participants*re ached achedby the the/

f ‘l——._._s.1

ta

\

participants*re ached achedby the the/

f ‘l——._._s.1

ta

\

de$eased [Nakul]and theappellantKeekram had1nlp1allyengagedin grapplingand Qthérswereattractedlatercouldon;thelearned[Judge][ held that][ the][ participants]bemeldliable[only]for[thelr]ind1v1dualacts andliablllty.0ncould [not][ be]fastene&[any][ constructive]the basisoftheevidence[bf]Baijnath(P.W‘.4‘),theleannedi[trial]courtcame[to]theconclusion[that]inlVsofarastheinjuryesinflicted[upon][ Kamala bai]wasandBihariwereconcerned[only][ co—dccused][ Maahv]responsibleand in this view[of]thematter‘§a’n‘dfinding,»it was notaacaseforanoffenceu/s307LP.C.ii‘heco-accused[Madhav]andlearned[Judge][ convicted][ the]Biharito’rigorousfor4offenceimprisonment u/s.323o£oneand sentenceieachyear"and£ineofof' themRs.1000/—.Itwasstatedatthe bar[that]thetwoco—accused[had]notpreferredanyappealagainsttheir'conviction[and][ sentence.]x charge5.;Considering[the]case[with][ reference][ to]‘u/s302of theI.P.c.forthe murderof Nakul,thelearnedJucigefound[that]sincethe s Weapsont' ‘useé[was]lamerelylathiand theaccusedappellan’cjihadalsoreceived[injuries,]itappearsthattheaccused had[used]his weapon[with][ some]force.Thelearned[trial]court,and,therefore,ruledoutany[intention][ to][ commit][ murder]instead,found[that]theactof theaccused responSiblefor[the][ death]ofNakulfellu/s304part—IIortheIP c.6:.In dealing[withrthe]assualt upon [deceased][ Nakul,]thelearned[trial]courthasplacedreliancesolely[on]the

....4

‘

.

.

eVidenceofP.W.6.IshwarPra3ad,as'the[other]witneasesexamined b’y[the]proSecution[merely]referredVtox[the]general[participation]oftheaccusedP.VJ;6IshwarPrasadstated in hisdepositionpersons.thattheaccused Kheekramcuringthe course of[ the]g1rapplingdealta blow overNakulandNakulalsobee;Kheekram.Itisonthe basisof thisstorythatthelearned[trial]court. has[held][ that]thepresentappellantwasresponsible£orcaueingtheedeathofNakul.Fromt’hdtestimony[of]P.w.6IshwarPrasad,itwouldappearthat.IshwarPrasad hadnotdisclosedthis£actin‘rilestatementu/s1610;.theCrPC.theaccused(Ex13-3)that/hadassualtedthedeceased.Though thelearnedcounselfortheappellantonthe basisofthestatement[made][ by]otherwitnesseshasgreatlystressedthatIshwarPrasadcouldnothaveWitnessedthelncldent\astheothervntnesseshadnotdeposed toabouthis0theFY:Lpresence,even/§01ng[by][ the]statement,1t1s‘thatthetestimony ofP3.¥W'..6.7IshwarPrasadespeciallyolearaccountoftheommissiono£thisfactin” hisstatementtotheFelice’cannotsafely beacted upontofoundaconviction.Underthesecircumstances,theveryfoundation onwhichtheconvictionis based-becomesshakyand benefitof’doubt mustgototheappellant.Accordinglywefindthattheprosecution[has]failed“Nagainsttoestablishtheoffence/xthepresentapoellant.theresultappealisallowed.’fheconvictionandInthissentencemassedagainsttheappellantaresetaside.Theappellantbesetatlibertyifnotrequiredginanyothercase .sal—\l