MAL SINGH versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2009] 9 S.C.R. 929 · Decided: 28-04-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 9 S.C.R. 929 
/ 
-./ 
MAL SINGH 
A 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 946 of 2009) 
APRIL 28, 2009 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR 
GANGULY, JJ.] 
,( 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302 - Prosecution of four accused 
- For causing death and injuries - Trial court on the evidence c 
of eyewitnesses convicting three accused u/ss. 302134, 307 I 
34 and 328134 /PC - One co-accused acquitted - High Court 
convicting appellant-accused u/s 302 and convicting one of 
the co-accused uls 325 /PC - On appeal, held: High Court 
rightly convicted the appellant-accused - Medical evidence 
D 
; 
corroborates evidence of injured eye-witness. 
CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 946 of 2009. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 25.06.2008 of the High 
E 
Court of M.P. at Indore in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2001: 
Indra Sawhney (A.C.) for the Appellant: 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
F 
Dr. ARIJl:r PASAYAT, J. 1. Delay condoned. 
2. Leave granted. 
~ 
3. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the G 
Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore 
affirming the conviction of the appellant recorded by the learned 
- Additional Sessions Judge, Kukshi (District Dhar) in Sessions 
Trial No. 90/2000. One of the co-accused person Nanki Bai 
929 
H 
930 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009) 9 S.C.R. 
A was acquitted. The accused were convicted for offences 
punishable -under Sec.302 read with Sec.34 and Sec.307 read 
with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Cnde, 1860 (in short 'the IPC'). 
They were also convicted in terms of Sec.323 read with Sec.34 
IPC. The latter two convictions were recorded.as the accused 
B persons inflicted injuries to Thavlibai PW.3 and Thakur Singh 
PW.2. 
4. Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows: 
5. On 9/12/1999 at 7.40 p.m., FIR (Ex.p/9) was lodged by 
C Thakur Singh at 9.35 a.m. While the mother of the complainant 
Thakur Singh and his father Jogadia were sitting on their · otla' 
outside the house, the accused persons approached towards 
the deceased and the 'witnesses stating that their mother 
Thavlibai was engaged in witchcraft, started beating the 
D deceased Jogadia and his wife Thavlibai. When witnesses tried 
to save them, they were also extended the same treatment, with 
the result Thavlibai, after sustaining injuries over her head and 
mouth, became unconscious and Jogadia succumbed to the 
injuries. After so assaulting the deceased and his wife, the 
E accused persons fled away. 
· 
6. As the complainant Thakur Singh was injured, he was 
sent for medical examination under Requisition Ex.P/1, and 
Thavlibai under Ex.p/2. After examination of their injuries, Dr. 
S.L. Mujalda (PW.1) issued injury reports Exs.P/3 and P/4. The 
F investigating officer proceeded to the spot and took samples 
of blood stained and plain earth as also the blood stains lying 
on the ground. Inquest was held and inquest memo Ex.P/16 
was prepared. The body was forwarded to the hospital for 
autopsy and Dr. S.L. Mujalda (PW.1), after autopsy, issued 
G post-mortem report Ex.P/6. According to the testimony of the 
said Doctor and his report Ex.P/6, the following external injuries 
were found on the body of the deceased. 
1. 
Contusion wound 6 cm. x 3 cm at root of nose. 
H 
MAL SINGH v. STATE OF M.P. 
931 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 
• 
~ 
I 
Fracture of Nasal bone; 
A 
( 
2. 
Laceration wound 4 cm x 3 cm on front of head at 
left side of the mid line; 
3. 
Laceration wound 8 cm x 3 cm at the top of the 
8 
head (skull) fracture of skull bone at the parietal 
area, fracture simple; 
4. 
Laceration wound 4 cm x 5 cm at right side of the 
~ 
head at front area; 
' 
c 
5. 
Laceration wound 6 cm x 4 cm at occipital area. of 
head. 
The Dr. S.L. Mujalda (PW 1) opined that.death occurred 
on account of haemorrhagic shock due to head injury. 
D 
6. The accused were arrested and the seized articles were 
sent for examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory. After 
completion of the investigation charge-sheet was filed. The 
accused persons pleaded innocence. The trial Court hold them 
guilty. 
E 
7. Three appellants before the High Court i.e. Mal Singh, 
Lal Singh and Juansingh were convicted by the trial Court while 
Nanki Bai was acquitted. The trial Court referred to the 
evidences of PWs. 2,3,4,5 and 6 who claimed to be eye· 
F 
witnesses. The trial Court placed reliance on these witnesses 
and recorded conviction. Before the High Court the main 
question raised related to the appli

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.