XI-HC—78 Kf sn^s wi ftt-fi'* W^ 3TT^?T »>*ii<ft «• *11WII VhWih "3^ ^WIW^, •Qxhww, ^WWy. _.6T,a.....(is6/ sn^B 'q^q? (ipfgsi^E;) Tsitwgtoan^r APPELLANT- (In Jail) RESPONDENT: {Criminal appeal under Sec| Pl Division Bench: Hon'ble Mr. L.C. Bhadoo and Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. JJ. 24-6-2008 Mr. Vishnu Koshta, couns^t Mr. Rakesh Jha, Deputy Oral judgment dictated on L.C. Bhadoo. J: - This appeal is directed against sentence dated 25 October, Judge, Manendragarh in Ses|s whereunder learned Additional S| appellant guilty for commission df sentenced him to undergo impris in default of payment offine to «*t'4l<rl'(H'1 TIFI^if ^ 'f?1^ <^f'^)'(. ^; sifin sn^i sw Darra @ Gahadt S/o Ramnath Gond, aged about 18 years, R/oVillage Badratola, Khogapani, Police Station Manendragarh, Distt. Korea (C.G.) Versus - State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station Manendragarh, Distt. Korea (C.G.) tion 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal •ocedure} for the appellant. t. Advocate for the State/respondent. Gbvt. Pais. |:he judgment of conviction and order of 2p02 passed by theAdditional Sessions iions Trial No.346/2001, whereby & i^ssions Judge after hotding the accused/ offence under Section 302 ofthel.P.C., ^onment for life & pay a fine of Rs.500/-, fu|1her undergo R.l. for five months. 1lf!j^ XI-HC—78 i0. *11*1<flll »)<qra» 3^T '<<i<iid<i,ynlyitc, fsi^iy^ ^..<h:...ft..:.l.[gfl ^ sn^i 'cix^' ('^?f3si^r) SS^V W k-i'l'* WIT 3TT^T ?b^i<n TCiTwalt^ sii^i qtM[?l<fll tTm^f if -f^t^ ^R^ ^sifin SIT^I case OT ine prosecutlon, In bri Ramkumar (since deceased) hac uf, ii> llidt in ll'ie morning-ef-6-6-2001 gone to a publicwell for taking bath and for taking bath he was taking |out the water from the well through a bucket, but the rope of the bucl|;et was broken as a result of which the bucket fell down in the wetl, in o|rder to take out the bucket from the well Ramkumar went inside thewfelL ^nd brought the bucket. Thereafter, after taking bath when he Was going| to his house, on the way Shiv Prasad, maternal uncle of the accused/^ppellant, met him and asked him as to why he went inside the well as the well, however, deceased R^ when he was going to his agricij II the persons were drinking the water of mkumar went to his house. Thereafter, l^pKMt.<- Itural field and K^Esaeb®^in front of the house of Shiv PraSad, the acctjsed/appellant met him on the way and said that why he was abusing t|iis maternal uncle. The accused started abusing deceased Ramkumar, j)icked up a club lying on the ground and attacked Ramkumar with that lclub on his head as a result of which Ramkumar fell down. Ravi Sh^nker (PW-3) & Bhola (DW-1) intervened in the matter, but as a result o1| the injuries sustained by Ramkumar, he became unconscious. Ravi Sh^inker (PW-3) informed the brother-in-law ofthe deceased namely.Shiv Nfangal Singh on which Shiv Mangal Singh came and saw that Ramkumail was lying in unconscious condition near the house of Narayan. [ '\ The matter was reported by Stl Khongapani where Tejnath Sin] 1. Ramkumar was sent to liv Mangai Singh (PW-2) in Police Sfation fah (PW-9) registered Dehati Nalishi Ex.P- Coitimunity Health Centre, Manendragarh for A T ^f?fi ,/ '%..^(I-HC—78 sn^v ^i R-fl'* ^T8TT ^TT^T'SR'TW 4; ^ W*1MI <b*ntb 's^s •<ii^i<nq, ^•ifl'y'i^, fsi<niyy,< »_..rh....&.....l.is6/ sn^i'T?^ (licifd8i<^i) ^aiw ^ift?! aii^r <*)l^Ift41'l ^wv^ ^ ^sv\ <f^^k ^3TfW3Ilt?I medical examination. ^ Oubal Oiitih took Dehati Nalishi Cx.P-1 to Police Station Manendragarh'where T.| Ex.P-12 for commissionof offend I.P.C. Injuries of Ramkumarwe| he saw that there was an ipjury i| x Vi cm. x 1 cm., one injury-on th^ right side of head in the size of 1 % cm. x % cm. and one injury was on th| deceased was complaining pair] from 6-6-2001 to 9-6-2001 and a| hospital to where he was taken ij (PW-13) examined and found W\ merg intimation was sent to P| handed over to the Police. Dr. V| on the body of Ramkumar. He sf the deceased died as a resultofl Police Station Manendragarh| L. Dewangan (PW-11) registered F.I.R. ;e under Sections 294, 506 & 323 of the fe examined by Dr. P.K. Rohan (PW-6), i the middle of head in the size of 1 cm. |e face in the size of 2 cms.x1 cm. The in the chest, he was under treatment fter three days, he was referred to Bhilai ^n 10-6-2001, where Dr. Harendra Shah |at Ramkumar was already dead. The t)lice Station Bhilai and the body was K. Sao (PW-16) conducted post-mortem ^w that the skull bone was fractured and coma. The merg intimation was sent to on 18-6-2001 whereupon Crime No.37/2000 was registered undei| Ex.P-1 1. Investigating Officer Asgar Ali (PW-12) arrested accused Sahaijleo and on his information one clubwas seized. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, l\|1anendragarh who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Judge, An|ibikapur, from where learned Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh r|eceived the case on transferfortrial. XI-HC—78 *II*ICTI (h*ll«h ~?ST •<iitfid<i, yal'y'Ko, [cidiy^ ...<^..:A....I.^^J sn^'?!'^^ ('yfl'f'^i) sii^rw R'li'* '?^T SffT^TsFtrfsp 'RdIW ^lftH Sllt^l <ftl*lta''frl *1HClf'^fe%l ^^K ^sifinai^n i6 proscCuiion in orosr 10 s^iciDii&n cnctFQCs 3Q3insi 6.1 7.1 8.1 examined 16 witnesses. Statemj Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in v| appearing against him and statec) implicated in the crime He' exarr] & Prem Singh (DW-3) in his ddfei] Learned Additional Sessions respective parties, convicted aforementioned. ;nt of the accused was recorded under )/hich the accused denied the material that he is innocent, he has been falsely jined Bhola (DW-1), Jethu Singh (DW-2) lice. We have heard Mr. Vishnu.Ko^ accused/appellant arid Mr. Rake^h on behalf of the State/respondenl ^hta, learned counsel on behalf of the |h Jha, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate Mr. Koshta has not disputedl Moreover, Dr. V.K. Sao (PW-| Ramkumar was admitted in the 6-2001. He conducted post-r was a haemotoma in the skull, blood was present in the brain, r1 cause of death was coma as a Ex.P-17. Incross-examinationh^ death cannot be caused on that the injury was not fatal medical evidence is corroborated icc(i->^used udge after hearing the counsel for and sentenced the accused as the homicidal death of Ramkumar. •|16) has stated in his evidence that ^ospital on 6-6-2001 and he died on 10- -mcjrtem on the body of Ramkumar, there fracture of fronto parietal bone, clotted jght parietal bone was fractured and the |result of the head injury. His report is has stated that it is incorrect to say that acc(|>unt of head injury or it is also ineorrect cause of death was coma. Above by the evidence of Ravi Shanker (PW- aitd 'ss T ^ XI-HC—78 «4TW)T(h*11<* ^=[ •<{w\v\^, ®TT1y'i<o,fs|<-fl'y9,< _...(L..A4.(.M/ •2^ 31I^TTra?T (iyf^«l<^l) sn^i vi Vw* '^TSn^T'^RR? i^rat^ifTOan^i i, t^yewitiicss lu Llic iii^iUd^t, iicyuntfCTrrjT With a club on the head as a result of stafted oozing out of the injury. In view of lence, it is established that the death of cfiN[<n<fli iffRRTf if 'fe^t T^T^K ^afflpTsn^r iu i id& 9. 101 accused attacked the tfeceased which he fell down and blood the above medical and ocular evi Ramkumar was homicidal ir>;natu 2d01 Tie wtfy As far as complicity of the accusejd that has also not.been disputed bfc (PW-3) daiming himselfto be the| his evidence that on 6 June, field and he reached in front of met him and asked him as to uncle, thereafter, there was ar| deceased Ramkumar, in the mea< lying on the spot and attacked o( which he fell down and became u| this witness defence has not discredits the evidence of Ravi beeln in the crime in question is concerned, / Mr. Koshta. Moreover, Ravi Shsinker eyewitness to the incident has stated in , when Ramkumar was going to the house of Shiv Prasad, the accused he was quarrelling with his maternal altercation between the accused & time, the accused picked up one wood the head of Ramkumar as a result of iconscious. In the cross-examination of able to elicit any circumstance which (PW-3). SHanker The above evidence of Ravi S medical evidence of Dr. P.K. Roh deceased Ramkumar, as also Dr. mortem. In view of the medical accused in the crime in question i lanker (PW-3) is corroborated by the in (PW-6), who examined the injuries of V.K. Sao (PW-16) whoconducted post- and ocular evidence, complicity of the established. :iiti 1 ^l-': ^^ "' s XI-HC—78 311^1 ^I R-fi«ti ^TT ^t^! Sh*lict)-M 12 1J T 'J? Hffl<MI fWctl ^^ '^WW^, »Tll-M<]S, [qdl'yy ..(s...A.m ^ sn^TTt?SF ('^(3^1) l^IIW ^lfe( SIT^I Mr. Kuslita argued Uiat if ll'ie scrutinized, the case Sgainst the 304 Part-11 of the I.P.C., as th^ sudden quarrel, in a heat of| <1. premeditation. ~ ,•'• ^. In order to appreciate the argun) <v) Ttn<4li 'RR^if tf 'feT^ <f^i^i< ^affinsn^i evidence uf Ravi Sliankur (PW;3) is accused does not travel beyond Section accused attacked the deceased in a passion without any preparation or ent advanced by Mr. Koshta, we have perused the evidence of Ravi Sh^nker (PW-3) who hasstated that on the fateful day, in the morning, Ramkjumar was taking out water from the well 1 through a bucket for taking bathj the rope was broken, thereafter,] when he was going to his hous^ went inside the well as the peop| thesaid well fordrinking. When however, the bucket fell in the well as he went inside the well to take out the bucket, he took out the bucket f[|om the well and took bath. Thereafter, maternal uncle and there was so sudden, the accused picked u [, Shiv Prasad asked him as to why he ^ of the vicinity were using the water of Ramkumar was going to his agricultural field, the accused met him and a|sked him as to why he was abusing his Tie altercation between the two. All of a \> the wood lying on the ground and attacked on the head of the det;eased as a result of which deceased Ramkumar sustained injury and f^ll down on the ground. As per the post- mortem report, there was fractur^ in skull bone & parietal bone and the deceased died as a result of com a. The above evidence of Ravi Sh^nker (PW-3) shows that there was an aU.ercation between the accused ]& the deceased on a petty matter, there r+ M T .*,. '%. "Sii&il %} S B ,,,'^y ":'^i- XI-HC—78 wwtra»t(ra» 3^ ^WM<i, W-^WI'c, hw^( ...<5?...-....&...-..:.(.(..&6J... sn^l'<raqi'(Tpf3^r) Sf^S W R-ii'b Vff afl^l *t|i«li wiim ^iftn sn^i "wasnuciiiiiiiu&ILy belvrfd&ll th agricultural'field, whereas the aci of his maternal uncle, there som' without any preparation or pre accused picked up the wood deceased on his head which accused it cannot be inferred deceased with intention to cause aeeused attacked the deceased inferred thatthe accused had the is attacking the deceased with cause his death. Mbreover, the Therefore, the case against the £ Section 300 of the I.P.C. In the does not travel beyond Section 3 In the result, theappeal partly su upon theaccused under Section thereof, he is convicted under sentenced to undergo R.l. for se\ in detention since 12-6-2001, tl sentence imposed upon him. required to be detained in any ot^ Sd/- LC.Bhad&Gi etinld^ tnH^rf ^f 'fe1^ <f^^i< ^faffinsii^i ^Iwu, RdiTikUrYYiai was yuliiy 10 his ij;used was standing in front of the house ^ altercation took place, all of a sudden, •tneditation, in a heat of passion, the 1/ing on the ground and attacked the pr|3ved fatal. From the above act of the 1 that the accused had attacked the his death. But the manner in which the i|vith a wood on his head, it can safely be knowledge that the manner in which he ^ wood on the head, he may likely to lincident took place in a sudden quarrel. ^ccused is covered under Exception 4 to circumstances, the act of the accused D4Part-llofthel.P.C. ;ceeds. Conviction & sentence imposed 302 of the I.P.C. are set aside, instead Section 304 Part-11 of the I.P.C. and en years. It is stated that the accused is lereby he has already served out the He be set at liberty forthwith, unless ler case. Sd/- T.P. Sharma i Judge