LEKH RAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
LAWS(MPH)-2017-9-207
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on
September 09,2017
LEKH RAM
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
DARYA SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]SARWAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. KRISHNA GOPAL [REFERRED TO]
GURBACHAN SINGH VS. SATPAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAMMI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
LEELA RAM VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA VS. STATE REPRESENTATIVE [REFERRED TO]
ISRAR VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
S SUDERSHAN REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
VALSON VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
BHASKAR RAMAPPA MADAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
JARNAIL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
VISHNU VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
BALRAJE ALIAS TRIMBAK VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
PRAHALAD PATEL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. NARESH [REFERRED TO]
WAMAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SHYAMAL GHOSH VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
MRITUNJOY BISWAS VS. PRANAB [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 31.3.2003 passed in Sessions Trial No.263/2001. During the pendency of the appeal, appellant nos.1 and 2 have withdrawn their appeal and the appeal filed by them has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.7.2016. At present, this appeal is on behalf of appellant no.3 Munni Bai and appellant no.4 Nanaku alias Nanak Ram. Appellant Nanaku is in jail and appellant Munni Bai is on bail.
(2.)The prosecution story in brief is that on 19.6.2001 one pig was killed in an accident. Deceased Kalu had taken that pig to his house and when family members were roasting the pig, at that time, appellant Nanaku came there. He abused the deceased and thereafter he had inflicted injury to deceased Kalu. Other persons had locked the deceased inside the room to protect him. Thereafter, accused persons came armed with lathis and sword. They had broken the door and dragged the deceased outside from room and killed him. The report of the incident was lodged at the police station. Police registered the marg and conducted investigation. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed. During trial the appellants abjured their guilt.
(3.)The trial court, after trial, held the appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under sections 302, 323 and 449 of IPC and awarded the sentence of imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.2000/-, RI for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/- and RI for 3 years with fine of Rs.2000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
(2.)The prosecution story in brief is that on 19.6.2001 one pig was killed in an accident. Deceased Kalu had taken that pig to his house and when family members were roasting the pig, at that time, appellant Nanaku came there. He abused the deceased and thereafter he had inflicted injury to deceased Kalu. Other persons had locked the deceased inside the room to protect him. Thereafter, accused persons came armed with lathis and sword. They had broken the door and dragged the deceased outside from room and killed him. The report of the incident was lodged at the police station. Police registered the marg and conducted investigation. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed. During trial the appellants abjured their guilt.
(3.)The trial court, after trial, held the appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under sections 302, 323 and 449 of IPC and awarded the sentence of imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.2000/-, RI for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/- and RI for 3 years with fine of Rs.2000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.