NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.1095-1097 OF 2011

Bahadur Singh & Ors. .. Appellant(s)  versus

State of Madhya Pradesh ..   Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

C. NAGAPPAN, J.

1.  These three appeals are preferred against the

common  judgment  dated  16.7.2009  passed  by  the

High  Court  of  Madhya  Pradesh  Bench  at  Indore  in

Criminal Appeal Nos. 1288 of 2006, 1362 of 2006 and

1408 of 2006.   

2. The appellants herein are five in number and

were  charged  along  with  ten  other  accused  on  the

allegation  that  they  armed  with  deadly  weapons

indulged in rioting and in furtherance of their common

object committed the murder of  Babulal  and caused

simple injury to Bhanwar in Sessions case no.193 of

2005 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam,

Madhya Pradesh.  The Trial Court acquitted two of the

accused persons and convicted the remaining thirteen

accused for the offence under Section 302 read with

Section  149  IPC  and  sentenced  each  of  them  to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a

fine  of  Rs.1000/-  each  in  default  to  suffer  three

months rigorous imprisonment each.  It also convicted

them for offence under Section 148 IPC and sentenced

each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two

years.  Challenging the conviction and sentence all the

convicted  accused  preferred  six  appeals.   The  High

Court  confirmed  the  conviction  and  sentence  of  five

accused by dismissing their appeals and acquitted the

remaining  eight  accused  by  allowing  their  appeals.

Aggrieved by the confirmation of their conviction and

sentence  the  said  five  accused  have  preferred  the

present appeals.

3.The prosecution case in brief is stated thus:

PW7  Shanti  Lal,  deceased  Babu  Lal  and  Shiv

Narayan are  brothers and on 7.8.2005 at  6.30 p.m.

they  had  gone  to  work  in  their  field  situated  at  a

distance from their village Dudhia.  In the evening at

6.30 p.m. they along with their servant PW1 Bhanwar

while returning to their house Babu Lal was riding his

motorcycle  and  PW7  Shanti  Lal,  Shiv  Narayan  and

Bhanwar  were  following  him on  another  motorcycle.

On the way motorcycle of Babu Lal went out of order

and he was trying to restart it, at that moment all the

accused  armed  with  dharia,  axe,  sword,  balam and

lathies surrounded Babu Lal and the accused persons

Aziz  son  of  Wali  Mohammad  and  Aziz  son  of  Jan

Mohammad,  Bahadur  Singh,  Madan  and  Dinesh

attacked Babu Lal by dharia.  PW7 Shanti Lal and Shiv

Narayan  tried  to  save  Babu  Lal  but  the  accused

threatened to attack them if they come near.  Servant

PW1 Bhanwar proceeded towards Babu Lal and he was

assaulted by lathi by accused Chand Mohammad and

he  ran  away.   All  the  accused  fled  towards  village

Ranayara.   PW7 Shanti  Lal  and  Shiv  Narayan went

near Babu Lal and found him dead.  They returned to

the village and PW7 Shanti Lal went to Police Station

Aalot and lodged complaint at 7.20 p.m.  PW17 Town

Inspector P.K. Sharma registered the case and Exh.P28

is  the  First  Information  Report.   He  took  up  the

investigation  and  went  to  occurrence  place  and

prepared Exh.29 Spot Map.  He conducted inquest and

prepared Exh.P18 Inquest Report.  He sent the body

for  post-mortem.   PW16  Dr.  Prakash  conducted

autopsy on the body at  Civil  Hospital,  Aalot  at  8.30

a.m. on 8.8.2005 and found 32 incised wounds and 3

abrasions on the body and expressed opinion that the

death  has  occurred  due  to  shock  and  excessive

external haemorrhage due to injury to neck, vessels,

air  passage  and  vital  parts  like  brain,  12-18  hours

prior  to  post-mortem.   Exh.P38  is  the  Post  Mortem

Report  issued  by  him.   PW16  Dr.  Prakash  also

examined  PW1  Bhanwar  and  Exh.P46  is  the  MLC

Report issued by him.

4. PW17 Inspector Sharma arrested the accused

and on their  disclosure statements he recovered the

weapons used in the occurrence.  He also seized the

blood  strained earth  from the  occurrence  place,  the

clothes of the deceased and other articles.  He sent the

weapons with Exh.P43 query to Doctor for opinion and

obtained  the  same.   He  sent  the  seized  articles  to

Forensic Science Laboratory with Exh.P44 requisition.

He  completed  the  investigation  and  filed  the  final

report against the accused.

5. The  prosecution examined PWs 1  to  17 and

marked documents to prove the charges.  The defence

examined  DW1  on  their  side.   The  Trial  Court

acquitted  two  of  the  accused  and  convicted  the

remaining  thirteen  accused  and  sentenced  them as

stated  earlier.   The  High  Court  confirmed  the

conviction and sentence imposed on five accused by

dismissing their appeals and acquitted the remaining

eight accused by allowing their appeals.  Challenging

their  conviction and sentence  the  five  accused have

preferred these appeals.

6. The learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellants contended that PW7 Shanti Lal could not

have witnessed the occurrence and his presence in the

occurrence place is doubtful and his conduct in not

going to rescue of the deceased is not natural and no

reliance can be placed on his testimony and the First

Information Report has been brought into existence by

putting ante dated and the presence of  some of  the

accused has been doubted by the High Court and that

would affect this substratum of the prosecution case

and the conviction and the sentence imposed on the

appellants are liable to be set aside.  Per contra, the

learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  respondent-State

contended that the deceased and PW7 Shanti Lal went

to their agricultural field on the occurrence day and in

the  evening  while  returning  to  their  house  on

motorcycles the appellants armed with deadly weapons

surrounded Babu Lal  and attacked him and due to

their threat PW7 Shanti Lal could not go near and his

presence in the occurrence place cannot be doubted

and the complaint  was also lodged by him at police

station within one hour after the occurrence and all

the  appellants  had  taken  part  in  the  brutal  attack

made  on  the  deceased  and  the  conviction  and  the

sentence imposed on them is sustainable.     

7. The prosecution case is that the appellants in

furtherance  of  their  common  object  committed  the

murder of Babu Lal by attacking him with dharia, axe

and sword.  The prosecution examined PW7 Shanti Lal

as having witnessed the occurrence.  PW7 Shanti Lal

is the younger brother of Babu Lal and he has testified

that on 7.8.2005 he, his brother Babu Lal and Shiv

Narayan  along  with  their  servant  Bhanwar  were

coming back from the agricultural field at about 6.30

p.m. and his brother Babu Lal was proceeding alone

on his motorcycle and he, Shiv Narayan and servant

Bhanwar  were  coming  behind  him  on  another

motorcycle and the motorcycle of Babu Lal got stopped

all of a sudden and he was trying to get it restarted

and at  that  moment  all  the  appellants  holding  axe,

dharia and sword emerged from the adjoining field and

attacked Babu Lal indiscriminately with their weapons

and they also threatened him and others not to come

forward  lest  they  would  also  be  killed  and  servant

Bhanwar moved forward and he was assaulted and he

ran  away  and  after  the  attack  the  appellants  fled

towards Ranayara village.  It is the further testimony

of  PW7  Shanti  Lal  that  they  went  near  and  found

Babu Lal lying dead in pool of blood and they went to

their house in the village and then he went to police

station, Aalot on motorcycle and lodged complaint at

7.20 p.m. and PW17 Inspector P.K. Sharma registered

the case in Exh.P28 the First Information Report.    

8. It  is  not  in  dispute  that  Babu  Lal  and  his

brothers were jointly cultivating the land situated at a

distance from their village Dudhia.  The contention of

the  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the

appellants  is  that  PW7  Shanti  Lal  was  residing  in

Aalot and was not in the company of the deceased on

the occurrence day and he could not have witnessed

the occurrence.  In the cross-examination PW7 Shanti

Lal has specifically stated that he has a Kirana shop

and a house at Aalot and he used to come to Aalot in

morning  and  return  to  village  in  the  evening  and

whenever there was work in the agricultural field, he

used to stay in the village.  On the date of occurrence

all  the  three  brothers  along  with  their  servant

Bhanwar  went  to  their  field  for  spraying  pesticides

and while they were returning home in the evening,

the  occurrence  had  taken  place.   The  testimony  of

PW7 Shanti Lal that he stayed back in the village on

the occurrence day on account of agricultural work is

natural and cannot be doubted.

9.      Babu Lal was intercepted and attacked by

the  appellants  armed  with  deadly  weapons  and  on

seeing the same,  PW7 Shanti  Lal  and Shiv  Narayan

shouted at them and they were threatened not to come

near lest they would also be killed and on account of

fear they did not attempt to rescue Babu Lal  at the

time of occurrence.  In fact,  they also witnessed the

attack made by the assailants on servant Bhanwar and

in such circumstances, the conduct of PW7 Shanti Lal

in  not  going  near  his  brother  Babu  Lal  during  the

occurrence  due  to  fear  is  quite  natural  and  the

contention  raised  by  the  appellants  cannot  be

accepted.  The other contention that non examination

of  Shiv  Narayan affects  the prosecution case is  also

devoid of merit.  PW7 Shanti Lal withstood the lengthy

cross-examination  and  nothing  could  be  elicited  to

discredit  his  testimony.   We  are  satisfied  that  the

testimony of  PW7 Shanti  Lal  is  natural,  trustworthy

and  credible  and  has  rightly  been  relied  on  by  the

Courts below.

10. The  occurrence  took  place  at  6.30p.m.  on

7.8.2005 and PW7 Shanti Lal lodged the complaint at

7.20  p.m.  in  Police  Station,  Aalot.   According  to

Investigation  Officer  PW17 P.K.  Sharma the  copy  of

F.I.R.  could  not  be  sent  in  the  night  and  it  was

despatched next  day to the Court.   The High Court

held that  in the totality  of  the circumstances of  the

case  there  was  no  inordinate  delay  in  sending  the

F.I.R. to the Court.  We concur with the view of the

High Court.

11. Babu Lal died of homicidal violence is evident

from the medical evidence adduced by the prosecution.

The autopsy was conducted by PW16 Dr. Prakash and

according to him there were 32 incised wounds and 3

abrasions on the body and the death has occurred due

to shock and excessive external haemorrhage due to

injury to neck, vessels, air passage and vital parts like

brain.  Exh.P38 is the Post Mortem Report issued by

him.  It is clear that  Babu Lal suffered a violent death

on account of multiple injuries.     

12. The appellants on their arrest gave information

which led to  the recovery of  weapons used by them

during the  occurrence.   PW2 Rameshwar,  PW5 Pare

Singh  and  PW6  Jagdish  have  testified  that  the

appellants  in  their  presence  gave  individual

information and took and produced the weapons from

the hidden place and they came to be recovered by the

investigation officer.  The said weapons were shown to

PW16 Dr. Prakash and he has also expressed opinion

that the injuries found on the dead body could have

been caused by those weapons.   

13. There  was  also  motive  for  the  occurrence.

There  was  a  bomb  explosion  on  the  day  of  Holika

Dahan which led to the arrest of the accused, who is

also one of the accused in the present case and they

were having grudge that at the instance of Babu Lal

they  were  implicated  in  the  said  case.   Besides  the

above  there  was  enmity  on  account  of  election  to

Shikshak Palak Sangh and meeting of Nirman Samiti

in  the  village  which  culminated  in  the  present

occurrence.

14. The High Court after careful and close scrutiny

of the evidence entertained doubt with regard to the

participation  of  eight  of  the  accused  on  account  of

absence  of  overt  act  attributable  to  them  and  gave

them benefit of doubt and acquitted them.  The ocular

testimony of PW7 Shanti Lal about the attack made by

the appellants herein on Babu Lal is corroborated by

the  medical  evidence  and  the  recovery  of  weapons

pursuant to the information furnished by them.  In our

considered view the conviction and sentence imposed

on the appellants does not call for any interference.     

15. There  are  no  merits  in  the  appeals  and  the

same are dismissed.

…………………………….J. (Jagdish Singh Khehar)

……………………………J. (C. Nagappan)

New Delhi; June 3, 2014

ITEM NO.1           COURT NO.3                 SECTION IIA                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A

                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Criminal Appeal No(s). 1095-1097/2011 BAHADUR SINGH & ORS.                         Appellant(s)                                 VERSUS STATE OF M.P.                                Respondents(s)

Date : 03/06/2014 These appeals were called on for Judgment  today.

For Appellant(s) Ms. Manjeet Chawla,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. C.D. Singh,AOR(NP)

Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Nagappan pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar and His Lordship.

For  the  reasons  recorded  in  the  Non-Reportable Judgment, which is placed on the file, the appeals are dismissed.

(PRAVEEN KUMAR CHAWLA)                  (PHOOLAN WATI ARORA)      COURT MASTER                        ASSISTANT REGISTRAR