Madhya Pradesh High Court
Umesh Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
1 CRA-8024-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 1 st OF MAY, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8024 of 2021
UMESH KOL AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Rishabh Singh - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Nitin Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Devnarayan Mishra
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is heard
finally.
2. This appeal is filed by the appellants being aggrieved of the
judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Link Court, Rampur Baghelan, District - Satna (M.P.) in Session Trial
No.229/2018 whereby appellants have been convicted for the offences
punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation of one year R.I., and
Section 323 r/w 34 of IPC (two counts) and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six
months (for each count) with fine of Rs.5,00/- with default stipulation of one
month R.I.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
2 CRA-8024-2021
3. In nutshell, the prosecution case before the trial Court was that on
07.04.2018 at 10:00 PM in the night, the appellants along with another
person went in front of the victim's house and started abusing him. His
parents had objected. On that, all the accused persons started assaulting the
complainant- Aden Kol, his mother Butan Kol and father Sudama Kol and
they cried for help, then Kanchan Kol, Aurn Kol and Shalu Kol came there
and rescued them. The appellants threatening them, left the spot. The injured
were brought to the hospital for treatment. FIR was lodged in Police Station -
Rampur Baghelan that was registered as a Crime No.213/2018 under Section
294, 323, 324 and 506 of IPC. During treatment, injured Sudama Kol died.
On that, Merg Intimation No.211/2018 was registered. Autopsy was
conducted over the dead body of the deceased. After investigation, charge
sheet was submitted.
4. The trial Court framed charges, in which the appellants have
abjured guilt and prayed for trial. On examination under Section 313 of Code
of Criminal Procedure, they have denied the charges and submitted that they
have been falsely implicated in the case but have not examined any defence
witness. Hence, after hearing both the parties, the trial Court passed the
judgment and convicted both the appellants. Hence, this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there was no
previous enmity and on that date, a quarrel started regarding the payment of
price of fish with Umesh. Dr. Alakh Prakash (PW-12) submitted that there
was a lacerated wound in the frontal region of the head admeasuring 3x2x1
cm. and the deceased died as fracture occurred on the head and only single
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
3 CRA-8024-2021
injury was inflicted upon the deceased. Furthermore, it is also submitted that
Aden Kol (PW-1) and Bhutan Kol (PW-8) have suffered simple injuries. No
assault was repeated on the victim and the sudden quarrel took place. Hence,
the trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellants for murder under
Section 302 of IPC as it is clear a case of 304 (Part-II).
6. Shri Nitin Gupta - Deputy Government Advocate has submitted
that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants as the accused
persons in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted the deceased and
his family members. No case for interference is made out. Hence, appeal be
dismissed.
7. We heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
8. Aden Kol (PW-1) has stated that on 07.04.2018 at 10 to 11 PM in
the night, the appellants Umesh Kol and Babulal Kol reached to his home
and started abusing his father and when his father came out, Umesh assaulted
his father with a Danda, his father had fallen down. He pulled back the
appellant- Umesh. On that, Babulal assaulted his father and both the
appellants assaulted him and when his mother came to rescue him they also
assaulted her. He dialled 100 Number and called Police. Police brought them
to S.G.M. Hospital, Rewa where his parents were admitted for treatment. He
lodged FIR (Exhibit P/1) in Police Station - Rampur Baghelan. His father
died during the treatment.
9. This witness has exhibited (Exhibit-P/1) in which it is mentioned
that the appellants came there and started abusing his parents and when his
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
4 CRA-8024-2021
parents objected, the appellants started assaulting his parents and also
assaulted to him and after interference by the family members, the appellants
returned to their home.
10. Witness Shalu @ Shanu Kol (PW-2) has supported the fact that
on the date of incident at 9 to 10 PM in the night, the appellants along with
Shubham came in their house and started abusing. When the deceased,
Sudama came out, the appellants Umesh and Babulal assaulted him by
Danda and when his grand-mother, Butan rescue his grand-father, the
appellants also assaulted her. The appellants also assaulted her father. In the
cross-examination, this witness has stated that in the case diary, statement of
D-2, she could not explain how it has been mentioned that Umesh Kol
demanded Rs.100/- that was given by him on credit.
11. The injured Butan (PW-8) has also stated that on the date of
incident, the appellants reached in front of their house and called her
husband Sudama Kol and when Sudama Kol came out, the appellants Umesh
and Babulal assaulted him by Danda and the appellants also assaulted her son
and her also. Babulal assaulted her by Danda. Witness Kanchan Kol (PW-9)
has also supported that both the accused persons assaulted the deceased
Sudama with lathi and also assaulted Aden and Butan.
12. As per post-mortem report (Exhibit-P/22), it is clear that only
one injury was caused to the deceased and that was caused by hard and blunt
object and by that there was fracture in the scull of the deceased and due to
fracture of frontal bone of the head and clotting of the blood, the deceased
died instantly. The injuries that other persons have suffered from the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
5 CRA-8024-2021
statement of Dr. S.K. Verma (PW-4), Aden suffered one injury in his right
side of parietal region. One injury in the right hand, one injury in the right
shoulder and one injury in left cheek.
13. Thus, this person except one injury and the injuries suffered by
the victim were caused by hard and blunt object. Butan (PW-8) as per her
statement, lacerated wound in the left side of eyebrow measuring 4x1x1.5
CM. Thus, Butan and deceased Sudama suffered single injuries and on head
the complaint Aden also suffered a single injury and as per the prosecution
case itself the weapon used in causing injury was Danda of Bamboo that was
recovered. No deadly or other dangerous weapon was used. It is also proved
that on the date of incident, the appellant Umesh was demanding Rs.100/-
that he has given on credit to Sudama and he called the Sudama and on that a
sudden quarrel was started and one assault was used by the appellant Umesh
on the deceased. No assault was repeated by the other accused.
14. Thus, it clearly demonstrates that the appellants were not having
intention to cause the death of any of the injured persons including the
deceased-Sudama. Thus, from the facts the knowledge shall be imposed
upon the appellants but there was no intention. From injury and the fact of
the case, it is also clear that quarrel had suddenly taken place on that date.
15. Looking to the above facts and circumstances, the conviction of
appellants for the offence under punishable under Section 302 cannot be
maintained. Hence, the conviction is converted from Section 302 of IPC to
Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC and for Section 323/34 of IPC (two counts),
conviction of the appellants is also maintained. Thus, appeal is partially
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20341
6 CRA-8024-2021
allowed and appellants Umesh and Babulal in place of Section 302 are
convicted for offence punishable under Section 304 (Part-II) and their jail
sentence is modified from life imprisonment to 7 years rigorous
imprisonment and fine amount of Rs.5,000/- and their substantial as well as
fine imposed for the offence under Section 323/34 (two counts) is
maintained as imposed by the trial Court. All the substantial jail sentence
shall run concurrently.
16. The appellant No.1- Umesh Kol is on bail. If his jail sentence is
not completed, he will surrender before the trial Court within seven working
days from today to complete his remaining jail sentence.
17. With the copy of this judgment, the record of the trial Court be
sent back.
18. The case property be disposed of in terms of the orders of the
trial Court.
19. Let the intimation be sent to concerned jail authority to intimate
the appellants.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
VB*
