Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sajjan Lal vs The State Of M.P. on 19 November, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688
1 CRA-2781-2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 19th OF NOVEMBER, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2781 of 2000
SAJJAN LAL
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate for Appellant.
Shri G.S.Thakur, Government Advocate for State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C") is filed by appellant Sajjanlal being aggrieved of judgment dated 13.10.2000 passed by learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.332/1998 convicting him for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C") and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one year.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant Sajjanlal is not an aggressor while infact it was deceased Anita Singh Thakur. As per prosecution case, the incident took place on 11.4.1998 when deceased Anita Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 2 CRA-2781-2000 Singh Thakur had washed the Shirt of Ashok Choubey, a Police Personnel and had spread it for drying in the compound of Raja Gokuldas Dharmshala where she was staying. When she did not find the Shirt, which she had spread for drying, she asked Sajjanlal as to why he had removed the Shirt. Sajjanlal started abusing her and in turn, Anita Singh Thakur also abused Sajjanlal. Sajjanlal had taken out a rod of Dish Antenna and had hit Anita Singh Thakur, as a result of which, she died. Though it is mentioned in the prosecution case that Radheshyam (PW.1), Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3), Gindiya Bai (PW.10) and two sons of deceased Anita Singh Thakur, namely, Vikram Singh (PW.4) & Ajay Singh (PW.11) had seen the incident but their testimony is not reliable. Radheshyam (PW.1) after having said that Anita Singh Thakur was an aggressor has deposed in Paragraph No.8 of this testimony that Anita Singh Thakur had taken a Danda and had hit Sajjanlal on his leg on 3-4 occasions and thereafter Sajjanlal had taken out an iron rod, which was stuck in his shop and had hit deceased Anita Singh Thakur, as a result of which, she died. The other witnesses appear to be more of hearsay rather than the actual eye-witnesses.
3. Learned Government Advocate for the State supports the impugned judgment of conviction of appellant Sajjanlal and submits that the act of Sajjanlal does not call for any leniency and, therefore, his conviction for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C be maintained.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
5. Radheshyam (PW.1) after having said that deceased Anita Singh Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 3 CRA-2781-2000 Thakur was an aggressor has deposed in Paragraph No.14 of his cross- examination that he had not seen the incident and he is giving his statements as per the information given by others. Radheshyam (PW.1) stated on his own that whether he will work for himself or will watch the incident. Radheshyam (PW.1) in Paragraph No.15 of this testimony deposed that there were differences between Ashok Choubey and Sajjanlal, which are still perpetuating.
6. Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) deposed that he has a Pan Shop by the side of Raja Gokuldas Dharmshala in Indira Market. By the side of his shop, there is a small Tapra of deceased Anita Singh Thakur from-where she was selling wood & brooms. By the side of Tapra of deceased Anita Singh Thakur, Tapra of Sajjanlal is situated where he was indulging in the work of repair of cycle puncture and was also selling wood & brooms. Deceased Anita Singh Thakur lost her husband Vijay Singh 5-6 years back. After the death of her husband Vijay Singh, deceased Anita Singh Thakur was looked after by Constable Ashok Choubey. Ashok Choubey was residing separately from the house of deceased Anita Singh Thakur but he used to visit Anita Singh Thakur to take care of her. On 11.4.1998, Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) was at his shop, when he saw that some hot talk was going on between Anita Singh Thakur & Sajjanlal. Thereafter, deceased Anita Singh Thakur stated that the Shirt was taken by appellant Sajjan Lal, an allegation which was denied by appellant Sajjanlal. During this hot talk, Sajjanlal had taken out an iron rod and had hit deceased Anita Singh Thakur on her head, as a result of which, she sustained grievous injuries & died on the spot and Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 4 CRA-2781-2000 Sajjanlal ran away towards the Yard Office.
7. Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) deposed that the incident was seen by Radheshyam (PW.1), Vicky, Kandhi, Gaggu & Keshav Patel. Vicky, Sanjay & Ajay are sons of deceased Anita Singh Thakur. Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) in his cross-examination deposed that he was busy running his shop and how the incident started was not seen by him. Due to the injury, deceased Anita Singh Thakur had fallen down on the road with a high impact. Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) in Paragraph No.18 deposed that all the proceedings, which were drawn at Police Station, were drawn by him at the Police Station itself. PW.3 in Paragraph No.20 admitted that it is correct to say that Tapra of Radheshyam (PW.1) is closer to the place of the incident than his own Tapra. There are several other Tapras/Shops near the place of the incident. PW.3 also deposed that the place of incident is better visible from the shop of Gaggu Gupta & Keshav Patel but both of them have not been examined by the prosecution. Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) also deposed that deceased Anita Singh Thakur had fallen down on the road by the side of her face down.
8. Vikram Singh (PW.4) is son of deceased Anita Singh Thakur and he has supported the prosecution case. He too has shown presence of Suresh Pan Wala, Radheshyam Chourasia, Keshav Chaiwala and his grand mother Gindiya Bai at the place of the incident. Vikram Singh (PW.4) in Paragraph No.12 of this testimony admitted that he had not seen number of injuries on the body of his mother Anita Singh Thakur.
9. Gindiya Bai (PW.10) has turned hostile and has not supported the Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 5 CRA-2781-2000 prosecution case. Gindiya Bai (PW.10) deposed that she had not seen the incident.
10. Ajay Singh (PW.11) is a minor son of deceased Anita Singh Thakur. Ajay Singh (PW.11) in Paragraph No.8 of his testimony admitted that the place of incident was in front of the shop of accused Sajjanlal. Ajay Singh (PW.11) denied the suggestion that the incident had taken place in front of Raja Gokuldas Dharmshala. Ajay Singh (PW.11) in Paragraph No.9 of his testimony admitted that he was standing on the other side of the road at the time of the incident. In Paragraph No.11, Ajay Singh (PW.11) admitted that due to high impact of the injury on the head, when deceased Anita Singh Thakur had fallen down, that place being rocky and she had fallen down by the side of her head, as a result of which, she had sustained injuries on her head on the posterior side. It has come on record that the human blood was found on the Dish Antenna Rod recovered at the instance of appellant Sajjanlal but its blood group could not be ascertained as was ascertained on the clothing of deceased Anita Singh Thakur.
11. Dr.S.K.Yadu (PW.2) at the time of the incident was posted as Chief Medical Officer in Medical College, Jabalpur. He had conducted postmortem on the body of deceased Anita Singh Thakur and had found following injuries on her body:-
1. Lacerated wound right fronto parietal scalp from 1'' above right eyebrow, before backwards (or A.P.Plased) size 9'' X 4" X 1". Margins of wound irregular. Brain in large amount coming out from wound underlying brain meninges torn. Fracture of frontal bone, right parietal bone below the Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 6 CRA-2781-2000 wound of the length of wound with gap of 2" in between margins of broken bone. Bone depressed and embedded in brain matter.
2. Lacerated wound right ear upper part (AP) 2'' X 1/2'' X 1/2".
3. Red contusion right scapular region on scapular medial border 1" X 1/2".
4. Red contusion on right scapular region measuring 1'' X 1/2".
The cause of death is mentioned as antemortem injury caused by hard & blunt object.
Head Injures:- Injury No.1 caused immediate death as it was fatal injury.
Injury Nos.1 & 2 were homicidal injuries. Rest Injuries (3&4) are simple injuries.
12. Dr.S.K.Yadu (PW.2) in his cross-examination admitted that the Police had not sent any rod or weapon for examination as to whether the injuries caused to deceased Anita Singh Thakur could have been caused with that object or not. He had not seen any injury on the rear part of the head of deceased Anita Singh Thakur. Injury Nos.1 to 4 could not have been caused with Article-A. Dr.S.K.Yadu (PW.2) in Paragraph No.18 of this testimony admitted that he cannot say that after getting first assault, whether the victim can withstand further assaults or not. Dr.S.K.Yadu (PW.2) also deposed that if the intensity of the first assault would have been excessive then the person looking to the physical status would have become unstable. As far as Injury No.2 is concerned, he had not seen any internal injury related to Injury No.2.
13. In view of the testimony of Suresh Kumar Chourasia (PW.3) that Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 7 CRA-2781-2000 deceased Anita Singh Thakur had fallen down with her face down due to high impact of the injury, what is to be examined is that whether there was any premeditation or there was any intention or mens rea.
14. The Apex Court in Paragraph Nos.6(7), 6(8) & 6(12) of Shaji versus State of Kerala in Criminal Appeal No.2293/2023 (Arising Out of S.L.P (Criminal) No.8100/2022 decided on 7.8.2023 has held as under:-
6(7). The distinction between culpable homicide (Section 299 of the IPC) and murder (Section 300 of the IPC) has always to be carefully borne in mind while dealing with a charge under Section 302 of the IPC. Under the category of unlawful homicides, both, the cases of culpable homicide amounting to murder and those not amounting to murder would fall. Culpable homicide is not murder when the case is brought within the five exceptions to Section 300 of the IPC. But, even though none of the said five exceptions are pleaded or prima facie established on the evidence on record, the prosecution must still be required under the law to bring the case under any of the four clauses of Section 300 of the IPC to sustain the charge of murder. If the prosecution fails to discharge this onus in establishing any one of the four clauses of Section 300 of the IPC, namely, 1stly to 4thly, the charge of murder would not be made out and the case may be one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder as described under Section 299 of the IPC.
6(8). The Court must address itself to the question of mens rea. If Clause thirdly of Section 300 is to be applied, the assailant must intend the particular injury inflicted on the deceased. This ingredient could rarely be proved by Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 8 CRA-2781-2000 direct evidence. Inevitably, it is a matter of inference to be drawn from the proved circumstances of the case. The Court must necessarily have regard to the nature of the weapon used, part of the body injured, extent of the injury, degree of force used in causing the injury, the manner of attack, the circumstances preceding and attendant on the attack.
6(12). In determining the question, whether an accused had guilty intention or guilty knowledge in a case where only a single injury is inflicted by him and that injury is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, the fact that the act is done without premeditation in a sudden fight or quarrel, or that the circumstances justify that the injury was accidental or unintentional, or that he only intended a simple injury, would lead to the inference of guilty knowledge, and the offence would be one under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC.
15. The Apex Court in Paragraph Nos.23 & 26 of Mahadev Prasad Kaushik versus State of U.P.& Other in Criminal Appeal No.1625/2008 (Arising out of S.L.P (Criminal) No.2023/2007 decided on 17.10.2008 has made distinction between "intention" and "knowledge" while committing the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Section 304 Part-I of the I.P.C applies where the accused causes bodily injury to the victim with the intention to cause death or with the intention to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death whereas Section 304 Part-II of the I.P.C applies where death is caused by doing an act with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 9 CRA-2781-2000
16. In the present case, admittedly the incident took place at the spur of moment when deceased Anita Singh Thakur demanded Shirt of Ashok Choubey back and appellant Sajjanlal pleaded his ignorance and thereafter there was exchange of abuses. Though Radheshyam (PW.1) has turned hostile in saying that he had not seen the incident but if part of his testimony is read and the place of incident is seen in terms of the evidence of PW.3, who has stated that he could not see as to how incident started, it being in front of the shop of Sajjanlal where Sajjanlal caused death of deceased Anita Singh Thakur by doing an act without any intention but may be with the knowledge that he is likely, by such act, to cause death of deceased Anita Singh Thakur, committed the offence of culpable homicide.
17. In this backdrop, taking this fact into consideration that the fatal injury was only one which caused death of deceased Anita Singh Thakur, there being no mens rea, no premeditation and the fight was sudden and the injury can be said to be unintentional, the conviction of appellant Sajjanlal, who is now 70 years of age & is facing Court proceedings for more than 26 years, is liable to be converted from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-II of the I.P.C.
18. We accordingly modify the conviction of appellant Sajjanlal from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-II of the IPC and direct him to undergo the jail sentence for a period of seven years with fine amount of Rs.2,000/- and the default stipulation of further one month rigorous imprisonment. The period of seven years of jail sentence shall be reduced by the period already undergone by the appellant Sajjanlal. He shall undergo remaining jail Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:56688 10 CRA-2781-2000 sentence. Appellant Sajjanlal is on bail. His bail bonds are cancelled. Appellant Sajjanlal is directed to surrender before the Trial Court within fifteen days from today for undergoing remaining part of his jail sentence.
19. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed in part & disposed off.
20. Record be sent back forthwith.
21. We are thankful to Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate for rendering his valuable assistance to the Court as an Amicus Curiae. We will be failing in discharge of our duties if we do not write the words of appreciation to the Amicus Curiae for giving instant assistance. Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Amicus Curiae will be entitled to remuneration from the Legal Aid.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
amit
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time:
11/22/2024 3:32:01 PM