LAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, two in number, have filed this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Code) against judgment dated 24-9-1993 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Narsingarh, District Rajgarh, (Bisora) in Sessions Trial No. 50/88, thereby convicting the appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of Prakash Mehta on 26-9-1987 at 7.00 p.m. between village Jamuniya and Sagpur and sentencing each of them to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) Facts lie in a narrow compass. Dhanna, father of the appellant Ladsingh had obtained loan from deceased Prakash Mehta. After death of Dhanna, the deceased demanded payment of money from Ladsingh. On refusal, deceased filed the suit against Ladsingh for recovery of the amount. Similarly on non-payment of money taken from the deceased by appellant Ghanshyam, the deceased filed a suit against him also. There was dispute of land between Ghanshyam and the deceased. On 26-9-1987 at about 7.00 p.m. the appellants attacked and assaulted the deceased by farsa and axe. Laxman (PW 5) informed the Choukidar Ramnath (PW 4). PW 4 lodged the First Information Report (Ex. P /11) saying that Laxman informed him that some one has killed the deceased Prakash Mehta. The autopsy was conducted. The post-mortem report is Ex. P/15. The police also registered Merg as 0/87 under Section 174 of the Code (Ex. P117). Spot maps (Exs. P/16 and P/18) were prepared. Articles were seized. Chemical Examiners report is Ex. P/23. The report of Serologist is Ex. P /24. The statements of witnesses were recorded. After completion of the investigation, challan was filed. Case was committed for trial. The Sessions Court framed the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. to which the appellants pleaded not guilty. Thereafter prosecution examined PW 1 to PW 19. The appellants proved F.I.R. of Crime No. 156/87 registered at Police Station Narsingarh under Section 307 I.P.C. (Ex. 0/7) which contained the version that unidentified persons had assaulted the deceased who was lying on the spot in injured position. After evaluation of the evidence, the Sessions Court recorded conviction and sentence as noted above. The appellants have questioned the validity of the same in this appeal.

(3.) We have heard Mr. Ashok Shukla, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Girish Desai, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State.