Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

28. It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, Senior Counsel, that since, the deceased was unconscious, therefore, his thumb impression was taken on the F.I.R., Ex.P.28. To buttress his contentions, the Counsel for the appellant Chandramohan has submitted that Jandel Singh (P.W.1) in para 6 of his cross-examination, has stated that the Chhuna @ Chhatra Pal Singh & Anr Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.474 of 2003) Harnam Singh & Anr. Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.512 of 2003) Indrapal Singh Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.609 of 2003) Mukundi Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.662 of 2003) Chandramohan Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.616 of 2003) deceased had studied upto 6-7 th class and was able to sign. Similarly, Jagdish (P.W.2) has admitted that the deceased Daghich had studied upto 4-5 classes. It is further submitted that according to the prosecution story, the incident took place on 28-10-1999 at 17:00 whereas FIR, Ex. P.28 was lodged at 20:00 i.e., after 3 hours. It is submitted that although Jandel Singh (P.W.1) has given an explanation that from village Nayagaon, they came to Akola on tractor and from there, they went to Police Outpost Dheerpura, where they were instructed to go to Police Station Indergarh. Similarly, Jagdish (P.W.2) has stated that after the incident, they stayed back in village for 1 ½ hours and thereafter they came to Akola and spent half an hour. Thereafter they met with Sarpanch and once again half an hour was spent. Then they went to Police Outpost Dheerpura, where they were instructed that they should go to Police Station Indergarh and accordingly they came to Indergarh. It is submitted that when the deceased Daghich had sustained gun shot injuries, then instead of wasting time, the witnesses should have rushed either to the police station or to the Hospital, but according to the witnesses, they wasted three precious hours. Thus, it is clear that they had ample opportunity to concoct the theory and it appears that Daghich Singh was already dead, therefore, the witnesses were not in a hurry and as Daghich Singh was already dead, therefore, his thumb impression was affixed. It is further submitted that the evidence of the witnesses Chhuna @ Chhatra Pal Singh & Anr Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.474 of 2003) Harnam Singh & Anr. Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.512 of 2003) Indrapal Singh Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.609 of 2003) Mukundi Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.662 of 2003) Chandramohan Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.616 of 2003) to the effect as to whether Daghich Singh remained conscious after the incident or not is also shaky. According to Jandel Singh (P.W.1), Daghich fell unconscious immediately after sustaining gun shot injuries, but in para 5 of his cross-examination, this witness immediately changed his version and denied that Daghich Singh had fallen unconscious. It is submitted that Suresh (P.W.5) has also stated in para 5 of his cross-examination, that after sustaining gun shot injury, the deceased fell unconscious. However, this witness also changed his version by saying that the deceased was talking. Thus, it is clear that Daghich Singh had fallen either unconscious or was already dead, therefore, the FIR, Ex. P.28 doesnot bear his signatures and it bears his thumb impression. It is further submitted that Udai Singh (P.W.3) has stated that after sustaining gun shot injuries, the hands and legs of Daghich Singh were not working, whereas Man Singh Kaurav (P.W.17) has stated that when Deceased Daghich Singh was brought to the police station, his hands were working. Thus, it is clear that there is a serious discrepancy with regard to the physical condition of Daghich Singh.