Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta

JUDGMENT

B.R. Gavai, J.

1. The present appeal challenges the judgment dated 6th April 2018 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal No. 261 of 1995, thereby allowing the appeal of the Respondent-State which was filed challenging the judgment dated 26th March 1994 passed in S.T. No. 160 of 1992, vide which the learned 2nd Class Sessions Judge, Damoh (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Judge') had acquitted the Appellants of the charges Under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'). The High Court, reversing the judgment of the learned Trial Judge, had convicted the Appellant No. 1 (Ballu Chaurasiya @ Balram @ Balmukund) Under Sections 302 and 201/34 of Indian Penal Code and Appellant No. 2 (Halki Bahu @ Jamna Bai @ Jamuna Bai) Under Sections 302/34 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for life Under Sections 302 and 302/34 with fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Insofar as Sections 201 and 201/34 of Indian Penal Code are concerned, the High Court further awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 months.

2. The prosecution story in brief is as under:

2.1 The deceased-Mahesh Sahu was in a love relation with Anita, who is the daughter of Respondent No. 2-Jamna Bai (Appellant No. 2 herein) and sister of Ballu @ Balram @ Balmukund (Appellant No. 1 herein). Anita and deceased Mahesh Sahu resided at Agra for about eight months and then returned to Damoh. Thereafter, the marriage of Anita was solemnized with another person. Even then, they were in contact with each other. Due to this enmity, on 7th June, 1992 at about 11:00 P.M., the Appellants caused death of the deceased in furtherance of their common intention. The prosecution relies on the evidence of Govind (PW-7), who saw that Appellant No. 1 was dragging a dead body from his house. He had also seen his mother, Appellant No. 2, who was washing the blood stains at the door of their house.

2.2 After Beni Prasad @ Beri Prasad (PW-1) and Sumitra Bai (PW-6), who are the father and mother of the deceased, came to know about the incident, they came to the spot of the incident. On the basis of the oral report of PW-1, an FIR (Exh. P-1) came to be ........