Summary
The appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code, by the high Court, for the murder of one Nagji, with whom he had strained relations. According to the prosecution there was bad blood between the family of the appellant and the deceased and there have incidents in the past, the last being the murder of two sons of the appellant and inflicting of grievous injuries on the third son, by the deceased, in which case, the deceased and his companions were acquitted. The appellant was keen to avenge the deaths of his sons and with that end in view, on 25th Septemeber, 1970, he along with three others, duly armed with guns and sticks, attacked the deceased, Negji, while he along with his son PW4 was working in his field. The deceased Negji raised an alarm which attacted the attention of PW 1 and PW 3, who were working in the adjacent field.
They reached the spot and withnessed the incdent. On thier raising hue and cry, the appellant and his companions fled away PW 4 had run away frightened when a shot was fired at him. The deceased Nagaji received serious injuries on the head and his leg was cut into two peices. PWs 1 and 3 went in search of PW 4 and on the way met two police constables PW 8 and PW 10 to whom they narrated the whole incident and disclosed the names of the assailants. The deceased passed away, when his body was being taken to the police station.The postmortem examination was performed on the 27th at 7a.m. The appellant was put up for trial, as others were abscondng. The learned trial Judge n appreciation of the prosecution evidence held that having regard to the long standing enmity between the two families, it was hazardous to place implict reliance on the interested testimony of PWs 1,3 and 4, more so because their testimony was not corroborated in material particulars by independent evidence. The Trial Judge applying the rule of prudence, did not convict the appellant on uncorroborated evidence of interest withnesses and accordigly acquitted the appellant.The State preferred an appeal to the - 456High Court. The High Court held that although the three prosecution witnesses were closely related to the deceased, their evidence could not be discards solely on the ground they were interested and partisan witnesses. The High Court found their evidence duly corroborated and therefore reversed and order of acquittal and convicted the appellant under Section 302/34, I.P.C. In this appeal the appellant had challenged his conviction. Apart from the question of appraisal of evidence,the appellants has placed strong reliance on the testimony of PW 2, Dr. Sharma and argued for the first time in the Court that his testimony shws that the death must have taken place long before 25the September 1970--there being blisters containing reddish fluid all over the body.Dismissing the appeal, this Court,HELD: Death had occurred on 25th September 1970 and the dead-body law in the police station with the wounds exposed till it was brought to the hospital at 5.20 p.m. on the next day. The body remained in the same condition in the hospital till 7.00 a.m. on the next day when the post-mortem examination was undertaken. The body thus remained fully exposed to the heat and humidity of the month of September for over thirty hours and hence it is not surprising that the rigor mortis had passed off. Ordinarily after rigor mortis has passed off, the process of putrefaction sets in but it may set in even earlier during summer depending on the heat and humidity.[462A-C]The evidence establishes the chain of events showing the movement of the dead body and rules out the theory that death had taken place many days before 25th September 1970, a theory not put to the witnesses in corss- examination.[462H-463]Blisters appear after the process of decomposition sets in within eighteen to forty-eight hours. It shows that the existence of blisters does not mean that death had taken 14 to 20 days ago.[464B]See the full content of this document
Extract
Daryao Singh VS. State Of Madhya Pradesh
PETITIONER: DARYAO SINGH Vs.RESPONDENT: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHDATE OF JUDGMENT15/02/1991BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J)BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J)RAMASWAMI, V. (J) IICITATION: 1991 SCR (1) 455 1991 SCC (2) 588JT 1991 (1) 465ACT: Indian Penal Code--Sections 34 and 302--Murder--Time of death--Blisters appearing on body--How far evidences the date and time of death.JUDGMENT: CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.480 of 1979.From the Judgment and Order dated 3.4.1979 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 239 of 1974.R.C. Kohli for the Appellant.U.N. Bachawat and Uma Nath Sing with him for the Respondent.457 The Judgement of the Court was delivered byAHMADI,J. The appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34, IPC, for causing the murder of one Negji, son of the Parthesingh, of village Melakhedi. The prosecution case was that the family of the appellant and the family of the deceased were at loggerheads since quite sometime and there was bad blood between them. In 1967, Bhowansingh, a member ...
See the full content of this document