Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Virendra Kumar Chaturvedii & Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 November, 2017

Author: Anurag Shrivastava

Bench: Anurag Shrivastava

                                     Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000
                                1

 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT
                    AT JABALPUR
    (Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice S.K. Gangele
    & Hon'ble Shri Justice Anurag Shrivastava)

              Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000.

             Virendra Kumar Chaturvedi & another
                            Versus
                    State of Madhya Pradesh.

None for the appellants.
Shri B.P. Pandey, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/ State.


WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING: YES/NO.

                         JUDGMENT

(13/11/2017) Per S.K. Gangele J This appeal is of the year 2000, no one appeared on behalf of the appellants. Since no one appeared on behalf of the appellants Smt. Durgesh Gupta Advocate, who is Panel Lawyer of Legal Service committee, is appointed as amicus- curie to assist the Court.

2. The appellants have been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC on two count and awarded sentence of life.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that nephew of the deceased Rajroop had married with the daughter of acquitted co-accused Shaymlal without his will in Court due to which the appellants had ill-will against him. On the date of incident at around 1 O'clock when the deceased were sleeping in the court-

Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000 2 yard (Aagan) of their house. The appellants entered into the house and inflicted injuries to both the deceased persons. Family members had seen the incident, they raised hue and cry. Other persons reached on the spot. The report was lodged at the police station at around 6.20 in the morning. Police registered offence and conducted investigation. After investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against six persons. The trial court convicted appellants and acquitted other co- accused persons and one of the accused Durga Prasad is absconding.

4. PW/5, PW/7, PW/9 and PW/10 are the eye witnesses of the case.

5. PW/5 Smt. Mandvee deposed that I was sleeping with her daughter in the house. The deceased who was my husband and her elder son Ravendra was sleeping in the court-yard (Aagan) at around 1 O'clock in the night I had heard sound of my husband and thereafter I had seen that Lallu, Santosh Virendra had been beating my husband. Lallu was armed with Farsa thereafter my both sons Narendra and Mahendra and daughter Baby came there and they had raised cry. Amarjeet and Ramayan were also came on the spot. When I came there I noticed that my husband was died and my son had serious injuries on his body. Thereafter, I lodged FIR at the police station which is Ex. P/3 and signed the same. The police came Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000 3 on the spot and conducted investigation. Spot map was prepared, I singed the same.

6. PW/7 Mahendra Prasad, who was minor at the time of incident deposed that I was sleeping with my mother and sister. On the date of incident we have heard sound thereafter I had seen that Durga Prasad and Santosh had been beating my father and brother.

7. PW/9 Amarjeet Pandey, deposed that the deceased was my uncle and another deceased was my nephew. I was sleeping in the chopan I had heard cry from the house of the deceased then I came at the place of occurrence. At that time I had seen that the accused persons were running from the spot. Accused Durga Prasad was armed with Gadasa, Virendra and Santosh were armed with Farsa. When I reached at the place of incident Rajroop was dead and Ravendra was alive, he was also died after sometime.

8. PW/10 Narendra Pandey, deposed that I had heard the sound and thereafter I had seen that Lallu @ Durga Prasad, Vinod and Virendra had been beating the deceased persons.

9. PW/11 Ramgarib deposed that I had heard cry and after that I reached on the spot, I had seen that some persons have been beating the deceased.

10. PW/13 Ramayan Prasad Pandey, deposed that I had reached at the spot after hearing cry of wife of the deceased Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000 4 and then I had seen that the accused persons were running from the house of Rajroop. They were armed with Gadasa, Farsa and Tangi. I noticed that both the deceased were dead.

11. PW/14 Sushila Devi, deposed that I had awakened after hearing cry of my mother and thereafter, I had seen that Virendra, Durga Prasad and Santosh had been beating my father and brother and other accused persons were present on the spot. Other persons also came on the spot.

12. PW/15 Kushdwaj Agnihotri, who is witness of seizure deposed that before me on the memorandum of accused Virendra which is Ex. P/22 and I signed the same a gadasa was seized by the police from his house vide seizure memo Ex. P/23 and I signed the same.

13. PW/16 Sajjan Singh, deposed that I was posted as Sub-inspector at Police Station Rampur and report of the incident was lodged at the police station and conducted investigation I prepared the spot map of dead body which is Ex. P/1 and P/2 and I signed the same. I also seized plain earth and red earth vide seizure memo Ex. P/36 and I signed the same. Some house hold articles were also seized. I recorded statements of witnesses. He further deposed that on the memorandum of accused Virendra, gadasa was seized from his residence, memorandum is Ex. P/22 and I signed the same and the seizure memo is Ex. P/23 and I signed the same.

Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000 5

14. PW/4 Dr. S.P. Mishra, deposed that I was posted as B.M.O. Community Health Centre, Rampur Naikin,District Sidhi I performed the postmortem of the deceased Rajroop and noticed following injuries:-

1. Incised/ cut wound on the occipital region of the head.
2. Incised/ cut wound size 4x1" depth of brain right side of the head on the frontoparietal region.
3. Incised/ cut wound size 3x1" depth of bone on the right parietal region of the head.
4. Incised/ cut wound size 3x1" depth of bone on the right parieto occipital region of the head.
5. Incised/ cut wound size 4x1" on the right side of face.
6. Incised/ cut wound size 3.1x2.1x1/2" on the chest.
7. Incised/ cut wound size 3.1x2.1x1/2" on the back side of chest.
8. Incised/ cut wound size 6x3x1" on the back side of chest.
9. Incised/ cut wound size 2.1x1" bone deep on the right hand.
10. Incised/ cut wound size 2.1x1/2x1" bone deep on the right wrist.

All the injuries were grievous in nature they were caused by hard and sharp edged weapons. The deceased was died due to the aforesaid injuries. He further deposed that I formed postmortem of Ravendra and noticed following injuries:-

1. Incised/ cut wound size 6x2x1" on the face.
2. Incised/ cut wound size 2.1x2x1x1" on the left side of neck.
3. Incised/ cut wound size 6x2x1" on left shoulder region.
4. Incised/ cut wound size 4x2" upto lungs deep.

These injuries were caused by hard and sharp edged weapons. Deceased was died due to the aforesaid injuries. The injuries were sufficient to cause death.

Criminal Appeal No. 2774/2000 6

15. The FIR is Ex. P/3 which was lodged by PW/5. It was lodged at around 6.20 in the morning. The incident is of the night. In the aforesaid report, name of the appellants have been mentioned. Eye witnesses deposed that the present appellants were armed with deadly weapons i.e. Farsa and Gadasa and they had inflicted injuries on the person of the deceased. The weapons were seized from two accused persons. There are other witnesses who deposed that they had seen the present appellants running from the spot. Dr. PW/4 who performed postmortem deposed that both the deceased had received incised and cut wounds on their vital parts. The injuries were sufficient to cause death of the deceased persons. There were number of injuries and weapons used by the appellants, proved the fact that the intention of the appellants was to kill the deceased persons. The appellants entered into the house of the deceased persons. They were armed with deadly weapons.

16. In this view of the matter, in our opinion the trial court has rightly held the appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the IPC (two counts) and awarded proper sentence. Hence, we do not find any merit in this appeal, it is hereby dismissed.

           (S.K. GANGELE)                       (ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA)
              JUDGE                                   JUDGE

MISHRA


  Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA
  Date: 2017.11.15 10:49:35 +05'30'