Skip to content


Kirtan Vs. State of M.P. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1984CriLJ1069
AppellantKirtan
RespondentState of M.P.
Excerpt:
.....in multiple fractures in the limbs as well as of the bones of the skull and..........him with a heavy stick by the appellant kirtan. in addition to that, there is also the testimony of tikamsingh (p.w. 4) to prove the extra-judicial confession made by the appellant. the only question, therefore is, of the offence made out against the appellant.4. shri pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the offence proved falls, within the ambit of section 304 ipc and not section 302 ipc. we are unable to accept this contention. the multiple injuries inflicted all over the body of 'the deceased, including head and face, resulting in several fractures, including fractures of the skull and face bones, leave no doubt that the injuries inflicted by the appellant were all intended injuries and many of them were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause.....
Judgment:

J.S. Verma, J.

1. The appellant Kirtan has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of his elder brother Cham.irsingh.

2. The incident occurred on the evening of 21.2.1980 in their house in village Sarwani in district Raigarh, The deceased was sitting in the house with Jaidha (P.W. 2) and Phattu (P.W. 3), and as consuming liquor when the appellant came there and demanded his share out of the sale proceeds of land which had earlier been sold away by the deceased. The appellant got infuriated at non-payment of money forthwith to him and he inflicted repeated blows with a heavy stick all1 over the body of his elder brother Chamarsingh. In this process, he caused as many as 11 external injuries, of which many were on the head and face and they resulted in multiple fractures in the limbs as well as of the bones of the skull and face. Chamarsingh died on the spot as a result of these injuries. The first information report (Ex. P-1) was lodged by the village Kotwar, mentioning these facts and also naming therein the eye witnesses. The fact that the appellant had made an extra-judicial confession in the presence of the village Kotwar and Tikam Singh (P.W. 4) was also mentioned therein.

3. The testimony of the eye witnesses Jaidha (P.W. 2) and Phattu (P.W. 3) is alone sufficient to prove that the injuries sustained by the deceased were inflicted to him with a heavy stick by the appellant Kirtan. In addition to that, there is also the testimony of Tikamsingh (P.W. 4) to prove the extra-judicial confession made by the appellant. The only question, therefore is, of the offence made out against the appellant.

4. Shri Pandey, learned Counsel for the appellant, contended that the offence proved falls, within the ambit of Section 304 IPC and not Section 302 IPC. We are unable to accept this contention. The multiple injuries inflicted all over the body of 'the deceased, including head and face, resulting in several fractures, including fractures of the skull and face bones, leave no doubt that the injuries inflicted by the appellant were all intended injuries and many of them were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. This is clear from the medical evidence itself in the case. There can thus be no doubt that the offence made out is that of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC. There is no ground to interfere in this appeal.

5. The appeal is, therefore dismissed. The conviction and sentence of the appellant are maintained.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //