Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 123 (MP)

Dewan Gond v. State of M. P.

2000-02-08

RAJEEV GUPTA, USHA SHUKLA

body2000
JUDGMENT Miss Shukla, J. -- 1. For the homicidal death of Banthu Gada on 24.9.1987, his friend accused Dewan Gond was prosecuted under sections 302 and 201 IPC. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the Sessions Judge Raigarh This jail appeal has been tiled by the accused challenging his conviction and sentence. 2. Accused Dewan and deceased Banthu were friends. They were exorcists and frequently went out together for work the case for the prosecution is that a couple of days before his murder the accused had gone to the house of the deceased and the two of them had gone together for work. He did not return back home. Later on his body was found in the Badi of the accused with as many as 10 injuries on his head and neck. 3. The body was first seen by Chowkidar Sunau (PW 1). He also noticed a trail of blood from the courtyard of the accused up to his Badi and Ramwati (PW 5) and Budhiyarin (PW 6) who are the wife and daughter of the accused told the witnesses that Banthu was killed by the accused. 4. The first information report Ex. P. 1 was lodged by Chowkidar Sunau. Blood stained earth and blood stained tangia. Art. A, were seized by Investigating Officer Jayant Verma (PW 7), and on completion of investigation a challan was tiled against this accused for offences under sections 302 and 201 IPC. 5. The learned trial Court relied on the statement of Sunau (PW 1) that Ramwati (PW 5) had told him that her husband Dewan had Kil1ed the deceased. He also considered the circumstances that the deceased had gone with accused Dewan, and that thereafter he was not found alive and his body was found lying in the Badi with trails of blood from the courtyard of the accused up to the Badi and seizure of blood stained earth and tangia from the house of Dewan to be conclusive evidence of guilt of the accused. He therefore, convicted accused Dewan under section 302 IPC. 6. On a re-appraisal of evidence, however, we do not agree that the evidence and circumstances appearing in this case are sufficient to bring home the guilt to the accused beyond doubt. Ramwati (PW 5) stoutly denied having told Sunau that Dewan had killed Banthu. He therefore, convicted accused Dewan under section 302 IPC. 6. On a re-appraisal of evidence, however, we do not agree that the evidence and circumstances appearing in this case are sufficient to bring home the guilt to the accused beyond doubt. Ramwati (PW 5) stoutly denied having told Sunau that Dewan had killed Banthu. We also find it highly improbable that a woman would voluntarily implicate her husband in a crime like murder. But in Ups case the question is not whether Ramwati (PW 5) made such a statement before Sunau. The question in issue is whether Dewan did kill Banthu. On that point, there are no witnesses. 7. As for the circumstances enumerated above we are shocked to see the casual manner in which the case was investigated. Sub-Inspector Jayant Verma (PW 7) had reached the spot the same night. He does not state before the Court that he found blood in the courtyard of the accused and that it was flowing into the Badi this was a very important circumstance, and had there really been evidence of bloodshed in the courtyard the Investigating Officer would have noticed the details of the extent, quantity and location thereof and would have described these details before the Court. Just a casual mention that he collected blood stained earth from the "Ghatna Sthal" does not serve any purpose the result is that the statement of Sunau (PW 1) does not find support from anyone else, not even the Investigating Officer that there was any blood flowing from the courtyard of the accused into his Badi. Not only this, the prosecution did not adduce any evidence that whatever was collected by the Investigating Officer from the courtyard of the accused in the name of blood-stained earth, was found to contain blood on chemical examination. No attempt whatsoever was made to show that it was the blood of Banthu which was shed in the courtyard of the deceased. 8. We also find that Investigating Officer Jayant Verma had dealt with the seizure of tangia, Art. A, in the same casual manner. While deposing before the Court, he does not say that this tangia, Art. A, had any blood-stains on it. There is no evidence to show that this tangia was put to chemical examination for confirmation of blood. 9. We also find that Investigating Officer Jayant Verma had dealt with the seizure of tangia, Art. A, in the same casual manner. While deposing before the Court, he does not say that this tangia, Art. A, had any blood-stains on it. There is no evidence to show that this tangia was put to chemical examination for confirmation of blood. 9. Under these circumstances, we consider it unsafe to base a conviction on only two circumstances that the accused and the deceased had left home together and the body of the deceased was found in the Badi of accused a couple of days later. We, therefore, acquit the accused giving him benefit of doubt. 10. This appeal is, therefore, allowed. Conviction and sentence of accused-appellant Dewan are set aside. The bail bonds of the accused are discharged.