SUKKU ALIAS SUKHRAT Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment-dated 28/6/96 passed by Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh in S.T. No. 19/ 95, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 304 Part II of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-and in default, to suffer R.I. for 6 months. At the relevant point of time, Dhanka (since deceased) was a resident of Village Laxmanpura. He used to have recurrent attacks of headache. The appellant, a resident of Durhatora and a tattooist by profession, undertook to cure Dhanka by making tattoos on his temples and occiput. In the process, Dhanka sustained internal injuries and was rendered unconscious. His son Jagdish (PW3) took him to Civil Hospital at Tikamgarh. Declaring him as brought dead, Dr. A.K. Jain, by way of memo (Ex. P/6), informed the Police accordingly. After due investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 304 of the IPC.

(2.) The appellant pleaded false implication due to animosity. In the cross-examination of Jagdish (PW3), it was also suggested that Dhanka had died of food poisoning after eating a rotten fish.

(3.) Jagdish (PW3) testified that his father Dhanka used to have frequent attacks of headache. According to him, it was in his absence that the appellant, despite being forbidden by him to do so, inscribed tattoos on occipital and temporal regions of his father's skull by means of a machine. He further deposed that on his return home, he found his father lying unconscious and the appellant explained that the tattoo marks were created at the insistence of Dhanka. Nothing could be elicited in his cross-examination so as to suggest that he was, in any way, interested in securing conviction of the appellant on absolutely false grounds. His evidence drew support from the medical evidence. Dr. B. Kathel (PW4) proved existence of the following injuries on Dhanka's body -