- (1.) In this appeal challenge is to the correctness of judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which affirmed the conviction under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC') as recorded by the Trial Court in respect of respondents 1 to 10 and did not accept prosecutions' plea that it was a case covered by Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. Eleven persons faced trial and the trial Court held A-11 Toran Singh to be not guilty. The accused persons were charged for commission of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and Section 323, I. P. C. for allegedly committing homicidal death of one Ramdin (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') and causing injuries on Harbhan (PW-5), Brijbhan (PW-10) and Bina Bai (PW-9). Trial Court white acquitting accused Toran Singh held that the other accused persons were to be convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34, I. P. C. The State of Madhya Pradesh filed appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the same was dismissed by the impugned judgment. It appears respondent No. 1-Darua had died on 15-6-1986, and that being so, the appeal stands abated so far he is concerned.
(2.) Background facts as projected by the prosecution are as follows : On 26-5-1980, about 8.15 a.m. PW-5 lodged first information report with the notice regarding alleged occurrence which took place on the previous day i.e. 25-5-1980. There was an exchange of words between Harbhan (PW-5) and Pratap Singh Thakur over payment of fare relating to hire of bullock cart. According to the informant, the rent was fixed at Rs. 15/- but Pratap Singh Thakur wanted to pay Rs. 13/-. When the exchange of words was going on, the accused persons armed with various weapons arrived there and accused Balkishan hit on the head of the deceased. The other accused persons assaulted him with various weapons. The deceased ran inside the house for protection. The accused persons continued to assault. When Brijbhan (PW-10) and Bina (PW-9) tried to rescue accused, Maharaj Singh struck on the head of Bina with farsa. Bhagwan Das and Badhraj struck her with lathies. Maharaj Singh gave a farsa blow on the head of the informant. Bhagwan Das and Badhraj struck on the hand with lathi on his left arm while accused Halka struck lathi on the right arm. Jagna struck him on the shoulder and he fell down. Even then accused persons inflicted lathi blows. Accused Ramdas also assaulted Brijbhan (PW-10). On hearing his cries for help, several villagers gathered. They also witnessed the assaults. Deceased breathed his last instantaneously and the informant became unconscious. Acting on the information given by the informant first information report was lodged. The dead body was sent for post-mortem and the injured persons were sent for medical examination. On the body of the deceased 8 injuries were noticed. One of them was the fracture of the skull. According to the doctor (PW-8) who conducted the post-mortem; the injuries on the skull were sufficient to cause death in the normal course. The accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication. Some of them were also examined and the medical reports indicated that they had sustained injuries. The trial Court held that the death was homicidal; but there was no definite material as to which of the injuries was inflicted by which accused. Additionally, it was observed that there was fight between the parties and the accused persons had sustained injuries. In the absence of any documentary evidence to show as to which injury could be attributed to which accused, the case was not covered by Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. But he held there being several other injuries on the body of the deceased as noticed. Case under Section 323/34, I. P. C. was made out so far as the deceased is concerned, as well as injuries noticed on PWs. 5, 9 and 10. As there was no definite material, so far accused Toran is concerned, he was acquitted. As noted supra, the State of M. P. filed an appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court which came to be disposed of by a Division Bench of the High Court at Jabalpur Bench. The High Court found that there were several injuries on the person of the deceased. Some were lacerated wounds and others were bruises. Doctor had opined that the injury on the skull was vital one. Having noticed this factor, the High Court further observed that the material evidence which has not come from the doctor, is the result of cumulative effect of the several injuries that the accused persons stated to have been caused, and for which death took place. There was also no evidence as to the authorship of fatal injury and, therefore, Section 302/34, I. P. C. was ruled out.
(3.) The appeal was dismissed so far as accused Toran is concerned.;