The State of M.P. vs Sohan And Others

Criminal Appeal No.576/2000

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Bench: Hon’ble Rajendra Mahajan J., Hon’ble Ashok Kumar Joshi J.

Date of judgment: 2^nd Nov 2017

Relevant Acts/Sections:

• Section 378 of IPC (Theft.)
• Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for murder)
• Section 377 of IPC (Unnatural offenses)
• Section 325 of IPC (Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt)
• Section 377 of CrPC (Appeal by the State Government against sentence)
• Section 145 of CrPC (Procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely to cause a breach of peace)
• Section 146 of CrPC (Power to attach subject of the dispute and to appoint receiver)

Backstory

In this case on 26.11.1996 at about 8 a.m., complainant-Shivdayal his elder brother Raghuvar and complainant’s wife Kasturi were cleaning their ruins (khandhar), regarding which dispute was existing between both the parties and case were also pending in the Court. Both the respondents Sohan and Ramdas came and claimed that these ruins belong to them and started arguing. Respondents gave filthy abuses; the complainant replied that he is having municipal council’s permission regarding ruins. At the same time, the respondent -Sohan to kill assaulted with a stone over the head of the complainant’s elder brother Raghuvar (deceased) and blood was oozing out from his head and Raghuvar fell and became unconscious. -Ramdas was abused at that time and was exhorting Sohan to assault on the complainant’s family members. Bharat and Sita had also witnessed the incident. After the incident, injured and unconscious Raghuvar was brought by the complainant to the Police Station, Seonda and on the date of incident at 09:30 a.m. complainant’s FIR at police station Seonda was scribed by Sub- Inspector K.S.Ahirwar  and signed by Town- Inspection C.R. Chandoriya.

It was considered that no useful purpose would be sub-served in enhancing the jail sentence over and above the jail sentence he had already undergone by the trial court and only awarding a fine sentence would suffice.

Appellant No.1-Sohan had undergone and fine sentence of Rs.5000/- (Five Thousand) in default whereof to suffer R.I. for six months. Also had deposited the fine sentence in the trial Court within 3 months from the date of delivering of this judgment, failing which the trial Court took steps for sending him to jail to suffer default jail sentence

Postmortem Findings

Dr. B.S. Tomar conducted the autopsy of Raghuvar on 27.11.1996 and recorded a postmortem report. In the opinion of Dr. B.S.Tomar, the death of Raghuvar had caused by coma because of injury to the brain and its effect. Dr. B.S.Tomar deposed that on 26.11.1996 at 10:00 AM in hospital Seonda on medical examination of Raghuvar aged about 80 years, he found a lacerated wound on the left side of the skull of size 2x1inch bone deep with fracture of parietal bone of the skull and at that time Raghuvar was unconscious and unable to speak and it was intimated that injured was vomiting and for x-ray examination and treatment, he had referred the injured to higher hospital. Dr. H.R. Morya proved his MLC report.

Dr. B.S. Tomar  deposed that on 27.11.1996 at J.A. Hospital Gwalior at about noon on starting of postmortem of deceased Raghuvar aged about 80 years, following antemortem injuries were found on the dead body:

1. One stitched wound over an anterior left parietal region of the skull has a length of 4.5cm;
2. A contusion size 3×2.5cm on right forearm;
3. Abrasion with a scab on the anterolateral aspect of the size of 7×3.5cm vertically placed;
4. A contusion present anterior left forehead of size 8×3.5cm vertically placed.
5. An abrasion, size 3×2.5cm horizontally placed over the right leg.
6. An abrasion, size 9.5×1.5cm on right leg near the right ankle, vertically placed.

In the opinion of Dr. B.S. Tomar, all injuries of the deceased were antemortem except above-mentioned injury No.1, all other injuries were caused by a hard and blunt object and only treating doctor was able to give an opinion regarding injury found on the head and in his opinion injury to the brain and its effect were fatal and he opined that for ascertaining the mode of death. Dr. B.S. Tomar proved his postmortem report (P-6).

It was proved that Raghuvar had died due to injury caused to his head. Dr. B.S. Tomar also deposed that on dissection of the dead body in the skull, left parietal and left temporal bones were found fractured and subdural hematoma of size 6x4x3cm was present in the brain and his opinion the injury caused to the brain and its effect was capable to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.

Judgment

The court held that the Appellant Sohan was directed to deposit the fine sentence within 3 months. The bail bonds furnished by both the appellants were stand discharged.