Hrishikesh Roy JUDGMENT
Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.
1. This Appeal has been preferred by 5 Accused, namely, Karulal(A-5), Amra(A-6), Kachru(A-7), Suratram(A-8) and Bhagirath(A-9). They challenge the judgment and order dated 23.6.2009 in Criminal Appeal No. 1637 of 1999 whereby, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench approved the conviction of the Appellants Under Section 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") and the resultant sentence for such conviction ordered by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur (hereinafter referred to as, "the learned Trial Court").
2. The prosecution case is that at about 8-8.30 AM Madhavji the deceased, was present in his fields on 18.8.1993 and his son Bhawarlal (PW3) was grazing cattle nearby. Bhawarlal suddenly heard his father cry out and saw that Amra, Kachru, Karu, Surtaram, Lalu (who is now dead) and Bhagirath were attacking his father with axe, sword, farsa, lathi, etc. On hearing commotion, Shyambai (PW 13), daughter of the deceased, and Bhawarlal (PW9) son of Kaniram and Babulal (PW12), also reached the spot. On seeing them, the Accused ran away. Bhawarlal then arranged a bullock cart and took his injured father towards Narayangarh. When they were crossing the houses of the Accused, Badambai, Munnabai, Ramibai, Sitabai and Veniram s/o Kachru, blocked the cart and tried to prevent PW3 from lodging the report and they also threatened to kill. But as other persons gathered around, the cart could proceed towards Narayangarh. On the way Madhavji died. Bhawarlal and Babulal reached Narayangarh Police Station with the dead body and lodged report at about 11.55 AM, within four hours of the incident. The distance between the police station and the spot is about 8 Kilometres.
3. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against six Accused Under Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Four others namely, Badambai, Munnabai, Ramibai and Sitabai were charged Under Section 506 Indian Penal Code as they allegedly obstructed and threatened the Informant, when they were proceeding with the injured in the bullock cart.
4. On evaluating the evidence against the 4 ladies charged Under Section 506 Indian Penal Code, the Trial judge held that this charge of obstruction and threat to kill the Informant, has not been proved and accordingly ordered for their acquittal.
5. Then the evidence against the Accused who were charged Under Section 148, 302 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code was considered. To prove its case, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses of whom, PW 1 witnessed the arrest of the Accused. Four others, i.e. Kishanlal (PW6), Prabhulal (PW7), Bh........