Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 417 (MP)

Jhoolan Yadav v. State of M. P.

2018-04-19

ANJULI PALO, S.K.GANGELE

body2018
JUDGMENT 1. The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 13.8.1996 delivered in S.T. No. 178/95 by Sessions Judge, Shahdol. The appellant has been tried for commission of offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC. The trial Court held the appellant guilty for commission of offence and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulations. 2. As per the prosecution story, the appellant had apprehension that deceased used to perform witchery. The deceased had gone on the date of incident to the house of the appellant for taking buttermilk. She returned back after an hour. The appellant told her that she used witchcraft against him to stop it, failing which, I would teach you a lesson. Deceased denied that she had practiced witchcraft. At around 6 o’ clock in the evening, deceased went to the forest to collect some wood, then she went up to some distance, then appellant Jhoolan came there and inflicted injuries on the neck of the deceased. She fell down on the earth. Mevalal (PW1) was there. Appellant Jhoolan told him that he would also kill him. Mevalal (PW1) narrated the incident to other persons, thereafter they went to the Chowkidar and report was lodged on 13.8.1995 at about 6 o’ clock at the police station. Police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet. 3. Mevalal (PW1) deposed that, my mother had gone to the house of the appellant at around 12 o’ clock to take buttermilk when she was returning back at around 7 o’ clock in the evening deceased went to khaliyan. My son Ramlal was playing in the khaliyan, he came and told me that the appellant had taken the deceased. I came from the house and noticed that my mother was lying on the earth in an injured condition. There were injuries on her head. Jhoolan was there, he threatened me that if I would there, then he would insure me. He was abusing my mother. Thereafter, he run away from the spot. I told the incident to Budhsen, Ramprasad and Shivprasad. They came on the spot. At that time, my mother was dead. Report of the incident Ex. P-1 was lodged at the police station. Police came at the village and prepared Panchnama of the dead body. 4. He was abusing my mother. Thereafter, he run away from the spot. I told the incident to Budhsen, Ramprasad and Shivprasad. They came on the spot. At that time, my mother was dead. Report of the incident Ex. P-1 was lodged at the police station. Police came at the village and prepared Panchnama of the dead body. 4. Budhsen (PW2) deposed that Mevalal told him that appellant had killed the deceased, I told him to inform the incident to Chowkidar. Thereafter, I, Chowkidar of the village, and other persons reached on the spot and Panchnama (Ex.P-3) of the dead body was prepared. I signed the same. Police enquired about the incident from the appellant and he informed about the weapon which was used in the incident i.e. tabbal was kept in his house. Tabbal was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P-9). I signed the same. Plain and red earth was seized vide seizure memo (Ex. P-8). Police also seized a towel vide seizure memo (Ex.P7). I signed both the documents. 5. Ramprasad (PW3) also verified the seizure vide memorandum (Ex.P-6) and deposed tabbal was seized from the house of the appellant vide seizure memo (Ex.P-9). He admitted his signatures on the documents. 6. Dhuriya Bai (PW5) verified the fact that appellant had killed the deceased. 7. Mevalal S/o Shivram (PW6) another witness deposed that I noticed the dead body of the deceased lying on the earth. I signed the Panchnama Ex. P-3. Ramlal (PW8) deposed that Mevalal told me that appellant had killed the deceased. 8. Ranglal (PW9) is the son of Mevalal. He deposed that Phaguni Bai was my grand-mother. She was in khaliyan. She was coming after taking buttermilk. Appellant Jhoolan came there and he had taken my grand-mother. I told the incident to my father. At that time, appellant had a farsi in his hand. 9. Maheshwar Singh (PW10) recorded the FIR (Ex.P-1) and verified his signature on the FIR. 10. Dr. M. Lal (PW14) performed the autopsy of the deceased. He deposed that neck of the deceased was cut and injuries were caused on the neck of the deceased by hard and sharp edged weapon. The injuries are ante-mortem in the nature. 11. Balgovind Pandey (PW13) Investigating Officer deposed that I prepared the Panchnama of the dead body and seized plain and red earth from the spot vide seizure memo Ex.P-8. The injuries are ante-mortem in the nature. 11. Balgovind Pandey (PW13) Investigating Officer deposed that I prepared the Panchnama of the dead body and seized plain and red earth from the spot vide seizure memo Ex.P-8. I enquired from the appellant on 14.08.1995 and recorded his memorandum (Ex.P-6). Tabbal was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P-9). I recorded statements of Mevalal, Bhuriya Bai, Ramlal, Ganpat, Jainandan, Ramprasad, Mevalal, Ranglal, Budhsen. FIR is Ex.P-1. It was registered on the information provided by Mevalal (PW1). 12. Mevalal (PW1) specifically deposed that when he reached on the spot, appellant Jhoolan was standing near the dead body. Appellant had a farsi or tabbal in his hand and he told me not to come near the place. Ranglal (PW9) son of Mevalal deposed that when the deceased was coming after taking buttermilk, the appellant had taken the deceased and he was armed with a tabbal. There was a motive to kill the deceased, because the appellant had an apprehension in his mind that deceased used to practice witchcraft. From the possession of the appellant a tabbal was seized. Doctor has corroborated the ocular evidence who performed postmortem of the deceased. 13. Hence, in our opinion, the trial Court has not committed any error and rightly found the appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under section 302 of IPC and awarded proper sentence. Consequently, we do not find any merit in this appeal. It is hereby dismissed. 14. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds are canceled and he is directed to surrender immediately before the concerned trial Court to undergo remaining part of the jail sentence, failing which the trial Court shall take appropriate action under intimation to the registry. 15. A copy of the judgment along with record be sent to the trial Court for information and compliance.