Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balram Sen vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 April, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
1 CRA-5151-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 24th OF APRIL, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5151 of 2018
BALRAM SEN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Mr. Vivek Agrawal - Advocate for appellant.
Mr. Manas Mani Verma - Government Advocate for State.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Devnarayan Mishra
This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by
the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and
sentence dated 05.07.2018 passed by 18th Additional Sessions Judge,
Jabalpur, District-Jabalpur (M.P) in S.T. No.298 of 2016 by which the
appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Life Imprisonment
with fine amount of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.
2. In nutshell, the prosecution case before the trial Court was that on
13.10.2015, the deceased Rajda Bee had gone to his village Hardua from
Jabalpur and at about 04:00 pm, went to fields to collect the woods for
cooking food along with Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1). After collecting the dry
woods from trees, she prepared a bundle of the woods and putting the bundle
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
2 CRA-5151-2018
on her head, she was returning with Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) to her home,
Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) was also having two woods in his hand and when they
reached near the field of Bhagwan Das, appellant Balram Sen was standing
there. Appellant Balram Sen threw the bundle of woods from the head of the
deceased Rajda Bee and started assaulting the deceased by sharp object on
her head and hands, as a result deceased fell down on the ground, after that
the appellant assaulted the deceased on her neck and face, then Sheikh Ibrar
(PW-1) got nervous and cried for help and on hearing his cry, Sheikh Gulam
(PW-3) and her grand-mother reached on the spot, the appellant ran away
from the spot and deceased in blood soaked lying on the field. Thereafter,
F.I.R. (Exhibit-P/1) was lodged at Police Station-Patan, District-Jabalpur
(M.P.) vide Crime No.362 of 2015 against the appellant under Section 302 of
the Indian Penal Code and marg number 49/15 was also registered. The
Police Officer Pradeep Jain (PW-7) visited the spot, prepared the inquest
memo/lash panchayatnama (exhibit-P/4) and spot map (exhibit-P/8). The
dead body of the deceased was sent for autopsy to CHC Patan, where Dr.
Kalpana Choudhary (PW-5) conducted the autopsy. On 14.10.2015, the
appellant was arrested and from his possession blood stain bakka and clothes
were recovered and seized, blood stains were found on the spot and on the
clothes of the deceased. Clothes and bakka recovered from the possession of
the appellant were sent for FSL Examination. Case was submitted before the
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patan and after commitment, the case was
sent to the Sessions Court and on transfer submitted before the trial Court.
3. The trial Court framed the charges under Section 302 of the Indian
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
3 CRA-5151-2018
Penal Code and read over to the appellant. The appellant abjured the guilt
and prayed for trial.
4. The trial Court recorded the evidence of the prosecution witnesses
and examined the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and recorded the statements of defence witnesses namely Sushila
Sharma (DW-1), Bhure Patel (DW-2) and Kundan Raikwar (DW-3) and
submitted that on the date of incident, the witness Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) was
present in his school and the timing of the school was 10:30 am to 4:30 pm.
There was a love affair between the appellant and the deceased. The sister of
the deceased had assaulted the appellant. The family members of the
deceased were objecting the relations and also threatened that if she would
not control herself, they would kill her. Family members of the deceased had
murdered her and the appellant having the love affair with the deceased, has
been falsely implicated in the case.
5. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court passed the impugned
judgment, hence, this appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prosecution
case is solely based on the statement of Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) and in
paragraph no.3 of his cross-examination, he has stated that he went to his
school at 10:00 am and returned from the school at 06:00 pm and after
returning his home, took the food and went to play and this fact is supported
by Sushila Sharma (DW-1) who was his class teacher and by submitting
(Exhibit-D/2), it was proved that on the date of incident, this witness was in
his school and he had not gone to fields to collect the woods for fuel and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
4 CRA-5151-2018
thus, he is not the eye-witness. None other eye-witnesses has supported the
case of the prosecution and from the statement of the prosecution witnesses
in which, Seikh Ibrar (PW-1), Hamidan Bee (PW-2), mother of the deceased
and Sheikh Gulam (PW-3) have clearly admitted that the appellant was
having love affair with the deceased and appellant wanted to marry with the
deceased but the family members were objecting as both were from the
different religions and have submitted that due to that the deceased was
murdered and appellant being the lover of the deceased, has falsely been
implicated in this case so that the original murderer could be saved.
7. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that there is a clear
evidence that Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) was present on the spot as in school
attendance register, the signatures of the students were not obtained and in
the cross-examination Mrs. Sushila Sharma (DW-1) has admitted that after
starting the school, just after prayer, the attendance is taken and the prayer
timing is 10:30 am and if any child leaves the school after marking his
presence, they do not mark him as absent. In the same way, the witness
Bhure Patel (DW-2) has admitted that what he has stated in the examination-
in-chief is hearsay evidence. In the same way Kundan Raikwar (DW-3) has
also admitted that regarding the love affair what is stated before the Court is
hearsay. Thus, there is no substance in the statements of defence witnesses
whereas, the prosecution's case is supported by the witness and by the seizure
of the weapon, the clothes and trial Court after evaluating the evidence has
convicted the appellant, hence, no interference is called for.
8. Heard the parties and perused the record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
5 CRA-5151-2018
9. Witness Seikh Ibrar (PW-1) in his statement has clearly stated that
he is well acquainted with the appellant and deceased Rajda Bee was his aunt
(fufi). On the date of incident at 12:00 pm, she came from Jabalpur to
Hardua in the house of her mother. He along with the deceased went to
collect the wood for fuel on the fields. He and his aunt collected the woods
and Rajda Bee prepared a bundle and put it on her head and also given two
woods to him which he was carrying in his hand and when they were
returning to their home, the appellant Balram Sen near the field of Bhagwan
Das met them and started assaulting his aunt by a weapon on her forehead,
hands and neck, he was perturbed, he came to the house of her grand-mother
and told her that Balram Sen had assaulted her aunt, on that Hamidan Bee
and his uncle Sheikh Gulam, mother Kammo Bai went on the spot but the
appellant ran away. He lodged the F.I.R. at Police Station-Patan (Exhibit-
P/1) and the marg intimation was registered as Exhibit-P/2.
10. In the cross-examination in paragraph no.3, this witness has clearly
stated that the incident is of 10.08.2015 (whereas the incident is of
13.10.2015) and when he was asked where he studied, he stated that he was
studying at Government School Patan and his school starts from 10:30 am
and closed at 05:00 pm and the distance of his school is 5 kilometer from his
home. By bus, he went to his school and he has further stated that on the date
of incident at 06:00 pm, he got the bus and then, went to his village and after
taking food, he went to play but subsequently, he has clearly stated that on
the date of incident, he had not attended the school as it was a holiday. On
13.10.2015, he lodged the F.I.R. at Police Station-Patan, District-Jabalpur. At
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
6 CRA-5151-2018
06:00 pm, he along with his uncle visited the Police Station and lodged the
F.I.R. to the effect that Balram has murdered his aunt.
11. In paragraph no.9 of cross-examination, this witness has stated that
on the date of incident, he could not explain on what reason it was holiday in
the school. This witness has also admitted the suggestion that they had
engaged a counsel Mr. M.P. Rathour and he understood the statement from
his counsel and after that he is giving the statement before the Court. This
witness has also admitted that on the report of the appellant, sister of the
deceased Bhuri is facing a trial in Patan Court and in paragraph no.7 has
specifically stated that the family members of the deceased were not ready to
marry the deceased with the appellant and appellant was having love affair
with the deceased and it was not possible to marry her as both belongs to
different religions.
12. Hamidan Bee (PW-2) has also supported this witness and stated
that Ibrar told her incident, thereafter, she visited the spot and her daughter
Rajda Bee was found dead on the spot. This witness has also admitted the
fact that the appellant wanted to marry with deceased and it was not possible
as both were belonging to separate religions. This witness has also admitted
that a quarrel had taken place between the appellant and Bhuri, sister of the
deceased, the case is pending before the Patan Court.
13. Sheikh Gulam (PW-3) has supported that when he got information
from Ibrar, he visited the place of incident and the deceased was found dead.
This witness has also admitted that there was a love affair between the
appellant and the deceased and appellant wanted to marry with deceased and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
7 CRA-5151-2018
also admitted that the appellant and the deceased wanted to marry with each
other but the family members were against this marriage as the appellant was
of Hindu community and deceased was of Muslim community.
14. D.S.P., Pradeep Jain (PW-7) has stated that on 13.10.2015, he
registered an F.I.R. on initiation of Sheikh Ibrar (PW-1) as Crime No.362 of
2015 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also registered the
marg No.49 of 2015 and after that visited the spot and prepared a spot map
(Exhibit-P/8). On perusal of the spot map (Exhibit-P/8), the place has been
shown near the field of Bhagwan Das Kotwar and a mango tree is also
mentioned in that and the slippers of the deceased were found on the spot, a
steel container for water and bundle of woods were found on the spot and the
dead body was found on the way.
15. Dr. Kalpana Choudhary (PW-5) has stated that deceased suffered
18 injuries and injuries were found on the forehead, right hand, mandible, in
chin, in the neck, in the nose, in the right arm, in elbow, in the left forearm,
thumb, right and left side of the knee and further stated that there was a
fracture in the right hand and fifth, sixth ribs of the right side, right lung was
punctured and the deceased died due to excessive bleeding. Thus, the injury
suffered by the victim is supported by Medical Expert (PW-5) and Ibrar
(PW-1), who has clearly stated that by weapon, multiple injuries were caused
to her aunt.
16. The mother of the victim has clearly stated that the deceased was
working in Jabalpur and on the date of incident, she came to her village to
visit her house and no contradiction is found in the statement of prosecution
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
8 CRA-5151-2018
witnesses.
17. On the point of the presence of Ibrar (PW-1) could not be doubted
on the basis of the statement of Mrs. Sushila Sharma (DW-1) as no
signatures of the students were taken in the attendance sheet and if the
student leave the school after attendance, then he was not being marked as
absent.
18. Due to love affair, the family members have killed the deceased as
stated by defence witnesses Bhure Patel (PW-2) and Kundar Raikwar (DW-
3), is not trustworthy as they themselves has admitted that what they have
stated before the Court is only on the basis what they heard in the village,
thus, they have no personal knowledge and also these witnesses have
admitted that on the request of the family members of Balram, they came
before the Court to depose and never disclosed this fact to any other person
or authority that any other person have murdered the deceased.
19. Looking to the above facts and circumstances and evidence
brought on record, statements of Ibrar (PW-1) are fully trustworthy, F.I.R is
immediate in which the name of appellant is clearly mentioned are the
prosecution has successfully proved beyond reasonable doubt his case
against the appellant, hence, the conviction recorded by the trial Court is
affirmed.
20. After above discussion, this Court dismissed the appeal being
devoid of merits.
21. The conviction and the sentence by the trial Court is affirmed by
this Court.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:19062
9 CRA-5151-2018
22. The case property be disposed of as per the order of the trial Court.
23. With the copy of the judgment, the record of the trial Court be
returned back.
24. The copy of the judgment be sent to the concerned jail authority to
communicate the appellant about the dismissal of the appeal.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
julie
