The State of Madhya Pradesh vs Brijendra Singh

By the present application, the State has sought for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 31.8.2009 passed by the additional Judge to the Court of Third Additional Sessions Judge, Begumganj District Raisen in ST No.17/2006 whereby the respondents were convicted by some offences but mainly they were acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under Sections 307/ 34, 365, 343 of IPC.

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 24.8.2005 the complainant Dashrat had lodged an FIR at Police Station Begumganj that he had enmity with the respondents and due to enmity they assaulted Kartar Singh. The complainant Dashrat went along with Kartar Singh to lodge an FIR upto Tulsipar and thereafter he sent Kartar Singh to Begumganj. When he was going back along Bharat Singh and Shankar Singh at about 11:00 AM the respondent wrongfully restrained him and started assaulting. Thereafter the respondents chased Bharat Singh and Shankar Singh to assault. They ran away.

After lodging an FIR the victim Dashrat was sent for medico legal examination and case was registered. In the meanwhile missing report relating to Bharat Singh was also lodged and thereafter Bharat Singh appeared before the Investigation Officer on 8.10.2005 that he was in custody of the respondents and after his release he reported at the police station concerned. He was also sent for medico legal examination and after due investigation the charge sheet was filed. After considering the prosecution evidence and submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-State, it appears that the charges of offence under Section 307 of IPC were framed against the respondents Shyam Singh, Laxman, Brajendra and Charan Singh. Dr. J.P.Patel (PW-1) examined the victim Dashrat on 25.8.2005 and gave his report Ex.P-1. He found two incised wounds on back of the head of victim Dashrat and three contused wounds on the right thigh, right hand and right shoulder. No X-ray report was submitted relating to the head injury caused to the victim Dashrat. On the first instance Dr. Patel opined that the injuries caused to the victim Dashrat were fatal in nature. There was no fracture found on the head of the victim Dashrat. No symptom of brain hemorrhage was found. Under such circumstances, the opinion given by Dr. Patel cannot be accepted that the injuries caused on the head of the victim Dashrat were sufficient to cause his death in natural cause of life.

Also there were seven accused persons implicated in the crime, whereas only five injuries were found to the victim, and therefore it appears that none repeated assault to the victim Dashrat. Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondents had intended to kill the victim Dashrat. Under such circumstances, the ingredients of Section 300 of IPC are not attracted, and hence no offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out against any of the respondents. The trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondents from that charge.

So far as the offence under Sections 343 and 365 of IPC is concerned, the charges are framed against Amar Singh, Raja Bhaiya @ Rajababu and Raghuraj. In the FIR lodged by Dashrat, it was not mentioned that the victim Bharat was abducted by some of the accused persons. It is alleged that a missing report was lodged relating to the victim Bharat, however no such report has been proved by the prosecution in the case. The victim Bharat has stated that he was kidnapped and kept for a month at an open place. His allegation appears to be unnatural. Avtar Singh (PW-6) was examined in support of statement of Bharat, but it was found in the cross examination of Avtar Singh that he had inimical relations with the respondents. If he was the person who released Bharat, then certainly he would have accompanied Bharat to appear at Police Station Begumganj, but he did not appear along with Bharat. The injuries found to Bharat by Dr.J.P.Patel (PW-1) on 8.10.2005 were 24 hours old. If Bharat was kidnapped and kept in the custody for one month, then recent injury could not be found on his body. Under such circumstances, the trial Court has rightly found that the testimony of Bharat and Avtar was not believable. Hence the trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondents from the charges of offence under Sections 343 and 365 of IPC.

There is no reason so that any interference can be done in the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court by granting leave to appeal. Consequently, the present application filed by the applicant-State is hereby dismissed at motion stage.

The case file of this case be annexed with the record of criminal appeal filed by the respondents.