Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 626 (MP)

Surendra v. State of M. P.

2002-07-04

S.S.JHA

body2002
JUDGMENT Appellant Surendra Singh was prosecuted for an offence under section 307 and 332 IPC and other appellants were prosecuted for an offence under section 307 read with section 34 and 332 IPC. The trial Court convicted appellant Surendra Singh and remaining appellants for an offence under section 332 IPC and remaining appellants for an offence under section 353 IPC. According to prosecution on 4.8.1991 head constable Ram Kishan (PW 9) alongwith constable Sunil Kumar (PW 10) and Ramesh Kumar (PW 13) had gone for investigation in Crime No. 95/91 for an offence under section 341, 506B/34 IPC. While searching the accused they reached bus stand of My ana. At the bus stand they met Hariom, Mahendra Surendra, Shyam and Ramswaroop. Constable Ramesh arrested Hariom and Surendra. Surendra with an intention to cause death has stabbed Ramesh on the right side of his chest. Head constable Ram Kishan caught Hariom, then Hariom assaulted him on the underarm of the right hand by stabbing a knife. Mahendra, Shyam and Ramswaroop have beaten Ramesh and they have taken away Hariom and Surendra from the custody of police officer. FIR was lodged by constable Ramesh Kumar at police station Myana. PW 9 Ram Kishan has deposed in examination-in-chief that he has seen Hariom near the culvert at village Myana. Hariom was an accused in an offence under section 506B, 341 and 34 IPC. Re ordered constable Ramesh to arrest him. Rariom was caught by Ramesh. Rariom was alone when Ramesh caught him. Immediately after Rariom was caught appellants Surendra, Mahendra, Shyam and Ramu reached the spot and tried to get Rariom released from the police custody forcibly. Ramesh did not release Rariom from his custody. At this juncture Rariom stabbed Ramesh at the right side of his chest and Surendra stabbed him by knife or the right rib. PW 13 Ramesh has deposed that when he was returning from village Myana towards police station then Surendra, Mahendra, Rariom, Shyam and Ramu were found near the house of Ram Bharosi Sahu. Re caught Surendra and Mahendra as they were accused in Crime No. 95/91. Rariom was also an accused in the case. Re has deposed that Surendra has assaulted him with a knife on the right side of chest. Read Constable Ram Kishan Constable Sunil Kumar had caught Rariom, then Rariom Stabbed Ram Kishan, on the right side of chest. Re caught Surendra and Mahendra as they were accused in Crime No. 95/91. Rariom was also an accused in the case. Re has deposed that Surendra has assaulted him with a knife on the right side of chest. Read Constable Ram Kishan Constable Sunil Kumar had caught Rariom, then Rariom Stabbed Ram Kishan, on the right side of chest. Surendra and Mahendra were taken away from his custody. Thereafter Mahendra, Surendra, Ramu and Shyam had beaten him with Kicks and fists. PW 10 Constable Sunil Kumar has not supported the case of prosecution. Re denied that any of the accused has stabbed constable Ramesh or head constable Ram Kishan. Counsel for appellants submitted that the prosecution story is concocted. The statements of the injured witnesses do not support each other in the said facts of case. Conviction of appellants deserves to be set aside as prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Counsel for appellants submitted that the trial Count has not considered the inconsistancy in the evidence while delivering the judgment. Apart from constable Sunil Kumar, independent witnesses PW 2 Shrikant, PW 7 Sonu have not supported the case of prosecution. There are material contradiction in the deposition of PW 13 Ramesh and PW 9 Ram Kishan. PW 10 Sunil Kumar has not supported the case of prosecution. There is material contradiction in the name of person who assaulted Ramesh in the deposition of Ram Kishan and that of Ramesh. From the evidence on record it is evident that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. In the said facts of case, conviction and sentence of appellant Surendra for an offence under section 332 IPC and that of other appellants Ramu alias Ramswaroop, Shyam and Mahendra for an offence under section 353 IPC is set aside and they are acquitted of the charge. Bail bonds and surety of appellants are discharged.