Gudda @ Vinod @ Pritam vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

The appellant has preferred the present appeal being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 05.09.2007 passed by the I Addl. Sessions Judge,

Shahdol, District Shahdol, in Sessions Trial No.200/2006 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for committing

murder of Brahmanand and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default 2 years R.I., and also convicted

under section 307 of the I.P.C. on two counts for attempting the murder of Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar and has been sentenced to R.I. for 5 years

on two counts along with fine of Rs.1,000/- on two counts, in default R.I. for one year on two counts.

In this case, it is not disputed that the marriage of appellant’s sister Laxmi was solemnized with Ramanuj, PW14; Laxmi died due to burning and

Ramanuj parents were prosecuted for committing her murder and were convicted under section 304-B I.P.C. and they are suffering life

imprisonment. Krishna Kumar is elder brother of Ramanuj, PW14. Â

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 4.6.2006 a Collective Marriage Function was organized at Budhar, District Shahdol, in which Ramanuj,

PW14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16, were present. The remarriage of Ramanuj, PW14, was decided to be solemnized with a girl namely Vimlesh, r/o

Manendragarh, and the preparation of marriage was going on, at that time appellant accused came on the spot and noticing the aforesaid facts he

informed the parents of Vimlesh that earlier Ramanuj and his family has killed his sister by burning her and if marriage of Vimlesh is solemnized with

Ramanuj, she might also be killed. Thereafter, he brought a plastic cane containing petrol and poured petrol on the person of Ramanuj and Krishna

Kumar. Deceased Brahnamand was also standing nearby. In the process of saving themselves by Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar, much of the

petrol was spread over the body of Brahmanand. With a view to kill Krishna Kumar and Ramanuj, appellant ignited the matchstick and thrown over

them; but, abruptly it was fallen on Brahmanand due to which he got burnt. Thereafter, the appellant accused fled away. Ramanuj and Krishna

Kumar were saved. The people present shifted Brahmanand to Community Health Center, Budhar. Ramanuj lodged the FIR, Ex.P/24, which

was registered at Crime No.322/2006 under section 307 of the I.P.C. and on the same day Brahmanand was referred to the District Hospital,

Shahdol. Later, he was referred to SIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, where he succumbed to the burn injuries on 7.6.2006. Marg Intimation, Ex.P/3, was

recorded in City Kotwali, Bilaspur. On the same day, post mortem was conducted at CIMS Bilaspur. According to the post mortem report,

Ex.P/16A, Brahmanand died due to shock and toxemia resulting on account of extensive burning. During investigation shirts of Ramanuj and

Krishna Kumar were seized. Appellant was arrested and on his instance a plastic cane was seized and sent to FSL for chemical examination.Â

Thereafter, on completion of investigation, charge-sheet under sections 302 and 307 of the I.P.C. was filed against the appellant before JMFC Budhar

who committed the case to the court of Sessions, Shahdol and after getting the case on transfer I ASJ Shahdol tried the case.

During trial, the appellant accused was charged with the offence under sections 302 and 307 of the I.P.C. He abjured the guilt and claimed to be

tried. In defence, appellant stated that he is innocent. Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar had poured petrol on Brahmanand and burnt him and the

appellant has been falsely implicated because their parents have been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. However, no evidence has been

adduced in defence.

The learned trial court after completion of the trial found the appellant guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced him, as mentioned

hereinabove.

The finding of the learned trial court is mainly based on the testimonies of Ramanuj, PW14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16 as other eyewitnesses

Arvind Gupta, PW4, Vijay Kumar Gupta, PW5, Brajesh Gupta, PW6, Kushal Gupta, PW8, Vishnu Prasad Gupta, PW12, Kallu, PW13 and Krishna

Kumar, PW16, even deceased son Ashok Gupta, PW15, have been declared hostile as they have not supported the prosecution story. The learned

trial court also got corroboration of the statements of Ramanuj, PW14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16 with the dying declaration, Ex.P/31 in the form of

statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. given by the deceased to I.O. R.P.Tripathi, PW18 and also recovery of plastic cane, article C on the instance of

the appellant.Â

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellant has filed this appeal on the ground that the

finding of the learned trial court is contrary to law. In the case, statements of Ramanuj, PW14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16 are not reliable as they

are full of contradictions, omissions and material points. They are not independent witnesses. They have personal grudge with the appellant

accused. Apart from it, the deceased’s son Ashok, PW15 has categorically stated that after the incident he went to see his father in the hospital

at Bilaspur where his father told him that Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar poured petrol on him and Krishna Kumar ignited the matchstick and set him

ablaze. At that time, some petrol was also spread over the appellant accused. After the incident he fled away to save himself. In the

circumstances, the appellant cannot be held responsible for the incident and he is entitled to get the benefit of doubt. Therefore, the findings of the

learned trial court are not sustainable in the eyes of law. They are based on conjectures and surmises and on the basis of aforesaid nature of the

evidence, appellant/ accused cannot be held guilty and convicted for the aforesaid serious charge. In the view of the facts and circumstances of the

case, prayer is made to allow the appeal and set-aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and acquit the appellant.

On the other hand, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent / State has argued in support of the impugned judgment and stated that the

finding of conviction and sentence of the learned trial court is in accordance with law. Hence, the appeal be dismissed.

Having considered the contention advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it is evident that in this case there is no

controversy with regard to the nature of death of the deceased. Ramanuj, PW14, Krishna Kumar, PW16 and other witnesses who have been

declared hostile namely Arvind Gupta, PW4, Vijay Kumar Gupta, PW5, Brajesh Gupta, PW6, Vishnu Prasad Gupta, PW12 and Kallu, PW13 have

stated that on 4.6.2006 in the Collective Marriage Function of a community, Brahmanand was set ablaze by pouring petrol on him as a result he was

burnt. Dr.J.N.Pandey, PW1 who initially examined the deceased on 4.6.2006 has stated that on the person of injured Brahmanand smell of petrol or

kerosene was emitting and his clothes were in burnt condition and his whole body was burnt. The percentage of burn was 80-85% and for further

treatment he was referred to District Hospital and MLC report was prepared which is Ex.P/1. Dr.Vijay Kumar Verma, PW9, has stated that on

7.6.2006 he performed autopsy on the body of deceased Brahmanand. He found wounds of burning over the body of the deceased and the burn

was antimortem, cause of death was shock and toxemia due to extensive burn. He further stated that looking to the excessive burn injury there was

no possibility of his saving despite of immediate and appropriate treatment. His post mortem report is Ex.P/16A. The aforesaid evidence has

remained unimpeachable, therefore, there is no hesitation to hold that Brahmanand died on account of burn injuries caused to him on 4.6.2006 in the

incident taken place at Collective Marriage Function of their community at Budhar.

Now, the main question for consideration is that whether the statements of Ramanuj, PW14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16, are reliable or not ?

Ramanuj, Pw14 and Krishna Kumar, PW16, have narrated the prosecution story in their statements disclosing that appellant getting angry because of

fixing Ramanuj remarriage with Vimlesh, came with plastic cane containing petrol and with a view to kill them poured petrol on them. Brahmanand

was standing nearby them.  When Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar tried to run away, much of the petrol was also spread on the person of

Brahmanand and the appellant after igniting the matchstick threw it over them, which had fallen on Brahmanand as a result of which Brahmanand

was burnt. However, Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar rescued. Thereafter, Ramanuj, PW14 lodged FIR at Police Station Budhar which is

Ex.P/24. Their shirts were seized during the investigation. I.O. R.P.Tripathi, PW18 has stated that on 4.6.2006 he recorded the FIR, Ex.P/24 at

Police Station Budhar as informed by Ramanuj and copy of the FIR was also sent to Judicial Magistrate Budhar. It was received by Ex.P/29 and

he also recorded the statement of Brahmanand, which is Ex.P/31, wherein Brahmanand has disclosed that on account of some enmity appellant

accused poured petrol on Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar. Unfortunately, he was also standing nearby them, due to which petrol was also spread over

him.Â

Shri R.P.Tripathi, PW18 has further stated that during investigation he seized the shirt Article B from Krishna Kumar which was wored by him at

the time of incident and was emitting smell of petrol, and prepared seizure memo, Ex.P.8. Similarly, shirt Article A wored by Ramanuj and emitting

smell of petrol was seized from Ramanuj and seizure memo, Ex.P/9, was also prepared and, on the same day, appellant accused was also arrested

and taken into custody and enquired about the cane and he informed that it was kept by him underneath flower plant situated along with wall of the

school. About this information memorandum, Ex.P/5 was prepared and at the instance of appellant accused cane Article C was seized and seizure

memo Ex.P/6 was prepared and accused was arrested vide memo Ex.P/32.

Shri B.D.Tripathi, PW17, S.I. Police Station Budhar has also stated that seized articles of this case were sent to FSL through Police

Superintendent vide letter, Ex.P/26 and report of FSL Sagar was received which is Ex.P/27.  As per FSL report, Ex.P/27 on shirts articles B and

C and Cane article D remains of inflammable petroleum hydrocarbons were found. The aforesaid statements of R.P.Tripathi, PW18 and

B.D.Tripathi, PW17, have remained unimpeachable. There is nothing on record to see their testimonies with any suspicion.

So far as the contention of learned counsel for the appellant with regard to contradictions and omissions in the statements of Ramanuj, PW14 and

Krishna Kumar, PW16 is concerned, having perusal of the entire statements given before the trial court or their police statements, Ex.D/1 and D/2,

we do not find any material or significatory contradiction which may be considered having adverse affect on the truthfulness of both the witnesses.Â

Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Yogesh Singh Vs. Mahabeer Singh and others, (2017)11 SCC 195 has held that every omission cannot

take place of a material omission and, therefore, minor contradictions, inconsistencies or insignificant embellishments do not affect the core of

prosecution case and should not be taken to be a ground to reject the prosecution evidence. In Juman and another Vs. State of Bihar, (2017)11

SCC 85, the Apex Court has held that oral evidence of witness can be looked with suspicion only if it contradicts previous statement; but, when there

is minor contradictions have no consequence and only elaborated form of statement recorded before the police cannot be said to be contradictory to

each other and the truthfulness of the witness cannot be doubted on the aforesaid reasons. Â

In view of the aforesaid legal proposition, the argument with regard to contradiction and omission has no substance. Apart from it, the testimony

of both the witnesses is not only corroborated by dying declaration, Ex.P/31 but also corroborated by FSL report, Ex.P/27. So far as the statement

of deceased son Ashok , PW15 is concerned, his police statement, Ex.P/25 is totally different and he has been declared hostile by the prosecution.Â

He has also admitted in the cross examination that the fact he has narrated against Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar has been disclosed by him first time

before the court. He never disclosed to any other person that appellant was not the culprit and Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar were the culprits.Â

He is the son of the deceased. His aforesaid conduct and behavior with regard to remaining silent in taking steps to prosecute the real culprits despite

the accused make him disbelievable or untrustworthy and on the basis of the statement of Ashok, PW15 credibility of Ramanuj, PW14 and Krishna

Kumar, PW16 remained unaffected.

In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are of the considered opinion that the learned trial court has not committed any error in arriving at the

conclusion that the appellant accused was the person, who, with a view to kill Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar, poured petrol on them and also poured

petrol on Brahmanand, who was present near Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar, and when appellant accused ignited match stick and thrown over

Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar, abruptly the same fell on Brahmanand due to which he got burnt. However, Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar

escaped. Brahnamand died due to the burn injuries sustained by him and the nature of injuries as disclosed by the medical experts were sufficient in

the ordinary course of nature to cause death, as Brahmanand could not be saved despite giving him immediate and appropriate medical treatment.Â

Hence, it is very well be held that the intention of the appellant was to cause such injury which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of

nature. Hence, the appellant has committed the offence punishable under section 302 of the I.P.C. for committing murder of Brahmanand and,

simultaneously, he has also committed offence of attempt to commit murder of Ramanuj and Krishna Kumar punishable under section 307 of the

I.P.C. on two counts. Hence, the conviction of the appellant for commission of the aforesaid offence is affirmed. So far as sentence is

concerned, in view of this court, there is no need to interfere with the sentence awarded by the court below, as the same is appropriate and in

accordance with law. Hence, the sentence part is also affirmed.

In the result, this appeal stands dismissed being devoid of any merits.

We express our words of gratitude for the assistance rendered by the Amicus Curiae.

A copy of this order be sent to the learned court below for information and compliance.