% HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BODRI, BILASPUR 4 Criminal Appeal No.443/2004 APPELLANT K P amp st t Panch Ram s/o ejao aged about In Jail) 4O ycars, occpatio stn' / ( un Mi Ro Baroda S Mana C Dirict RaipurCG) REsPONDENT State of Chhattisgarh Through ..Ma C sri Raipur ’ (CG) CRIMINAL APPEAL Uls 374 12} OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCUDERE Appearance: h S.P. ahu cunsel r e pellt I Shn' D.K. Gwalre, G.A. for the Stats. ivision Bench:- ’ Honble shri T.P. Shanna & ’ ORAL JUDGMENT (27.01201 1) Per T.P.Sharma, J. Challege in this appeal is to the judgmeot o conviction nd order of sentence dated 20.1.2004, passe by the Sessons Judge Raipu (CG) n S.T.No.178/2003, whereby and whereuiider the learned Sessions Judge, after holding the appellant guilty for commission of culpable homicide amounting to murder of his father in law- Manharan and causing grievous injury by sharp} edged weapon to Savitribai, convicted the appellant under Sectiono i. 302 and 326 of the IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment‘and fine of Rs.500/ -, in default of payment of nnewto fulither undergo R.I. for 1 month; and R.I. for 5 years‘and nne of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI. for 1 month. 0 VERSUS PSna amp Ditct Sri S, o fo th apan, ’ D, Honble Shri R.L.Jhanwar,JJ n f a d i r i 2. The conviction is impugned on the round that without there being any iota of evider'e smint for convicu'on o the apea the leamed Sesons Judge has convicted and sentence th apellant s aforementioned and hereby committed illegalit. \ 3. [ As per case of rosecution, on fateful day f 12.3.2003, t about 8.00 pm, Manharan (ince deceased) was resent is house; Wife of the deceased n ly anbai (PW'3 daughter f he appellant— Savit'ai (PW-2). an the appellant were also iesen in the same“ house. Some altercation took lace etween the deceased and Wife of the ppellant Geetabai, on which, th an ve 2 h c us i h te it ho tin ima IR ic e f pllnt, ei d e p a t y '2 p o a s p in h am e M ), o t nb d pt p b a e appellt went inside the house and took out betel axe and ga. - 3 blows to Manaran by the axe and aused his instantaneo death. When Savitribai tred to intervene, e “also assauld Savribai on her leg and caused grievous hurt. Ctu (PW— 1) went to Police Stao and lodged merg inttion vide EX. P/ 1 and F ide Ex. P/ The Investigating, Ocer left for the ce o v 2. $ sne f occurrence and after summoning witnesses, inquest ove the ea bo d p EX /5 Mp prepared vide Ex. P/4. Savitn‘bai wa sent or medical examination. She was examined by Dr. .K. ha (P vide X. / 2 t r n P 8 and found one deep cu wound over the ight ankle joit which ws bleedin, he immediate sted hr to the hospta. Dead body of Mr was sent for autosy to Dr.B.R. Hospita Raipuruwhere Dr. Ulhas Gonade (PW—8) conducted autosy vide Ex. P] 33 and found following injuries : i. A chop wound, sharp clea cut mgin with contusion along the margin, two inflictions transverse present 2 cm above right sterno clavicular, more on right lateral side of size 7 cm x 3.5 cm x bone deep, all muscles Vessels in between cut cleanly and shows triangular depression in cervical vertibra, C—S on lateral right side — size 4 cm x 0.3 cm x 0.3 cm clean cut. a g r dd dy of the decease was preared vide . P. a was s f D J W~7) E a g ly hif e il anhaan p l, p n ar s Impact abrasion on tight masillary temporal prominence irmgularily transverse — 5 cm x 2 cm On eight clavical lateral end a scratch mark 4.5 cm x 0.2 cm present. At 4 cm above iliac crest on right posten'or lateral aspect a transverse scratch abrasion 13 cm in length with a bifurcated limb in middle 3 cm Chop wound just below injury No.4 size 7 cm X 1cm X skin deep with contused marking. Impact abrasion present on both knee size 7 cm x 1cm one right and left 1.5 cm diameter, Chop wound with contused margin transverse present at upper part of left medial melleolus size 5 cm x 2 cm x bone deep Just above the above injury a transverse chop wound length 7 em with middle intact skin 1 cm X 1cm X bone deep scratch present. On left knee, over medial aspect a chop wound 4 cm X l cm x skin deep On lateral end of left wrist joint a cut wound size 2 cm X 1 cm skin deep Above left knee joint lower part on posterially on thigh 5 cm x 2 cm scratch abrasion present. Scratch abrasion on middle third of lateral aspect of left arm sizeScmx2cm ‘ Xlll. Oblique impact abrasion on left scapula size 6” and 4 cm, 4" interior angle of left scapula. Cause of death was as a result of shock and haemorrhage and death was homicidal in nature. The appellant has caused fatal injury to Savitribai; her leg was chopped, which was seized vide Ex. P] 11. Betel axe was seized vide EX. P/8; it was examined by the Dr. D.K. Jha (PW—7). During the course of investigation accused 1V . X1. X11. @D was taken into custody; he made disclosum statement of betel axe vide EX. P/ 7; same was recovered at the instance of appellant vide Ex. P/8. Blood stained soil and plain soil was recovered &om the spot vide Ex. F79. Sealed viscera and clothes of the deceased were seized vide Ex‘ P] 10. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code). After completion of investigation, charge sheet was tiled 4. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Raipur, who in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Raipur who conducted the tn‘al. 5. ln order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellant, prosecution examined as many as 8 Witnesses. g Accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code, in Which, he denied the circumstances appearing against him, innocence and false implication in crime in question was claimed, 6. After affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid mentioned. 7. We have heard Shri S.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri D.K. Gwalre, learned Government Advocate for the State, perused the judgment impugned and record of the trial Court. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that in the present case, conviction of the appellant is based on the evidence of interested witnesses i.e. PW-2- Savitribai, grand- daughter and PW—3 Manbai, wife of the deceased, which does not inspires confidence and trustworthy. He further argued that as per case of prosecution, without pie—meditation and on sudden, provocation, appellant had caused the aforesaid injuries, therefore, / if ths case of the pmsecution is consideled to be truc then 819:0 the act of the appellant does not travel beyond the scope of Section 304 Palt II of the IPC. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed these arguments and, submitted that the appellant is son- in-law of the deceased. He was present in the house and While some hot discussion of the deceased with Geetabai, second Wife of the appellant, the appellant went inside the house and took out betel axe and caused as many as 13 grievous injun'es to deceased, resulting into his instantaneous death. This shows his grave intention of culpable homicide amounting to murder of the deceased. The interested witnesses are none but, they are the grand—daughter and wife of the deceased; they were present at the ‘ time of incident, which was but natural. The appellant had not caused only injuxy to his father in law but he has also chopped the leg of his 18 years daughter Savitn'bai. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid mentioned . 10. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, we have examined the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. 11. in the present case, homicidal death as a xesult of fatal injury found over the body of the deceased Manharan has not been substantially disputed on behalf of the appellant, on the other hand, it is established by the evidence of Dr‘ Ulhas Gonade (PW-8) and autopsy report Ex. P] 33 and death was homicidal in nature. 12. As regards injury to Savinibai and its nature is concerned, same has not been substantially disputed on behalf of the appellant, on the other it is established by the evidence of 0 A Savitribai (PW-2) itself, evidence of K.B. Khatri (PW-6) and evidence of Dr. D.K.Jha (PW-7), injury Ieport Ex. P/28 and seizure of chopped leg of Savitribai vide EXP/11. The injuly caused to Savitribai was grievous in nature and has been caused by sharp edged weapon. 13. As regards complicity of the accused] appellant in crime in question is concerned, conviction of the appellant is substantially based on the evidence of Chotu (PW— 1) father of the deceased; Savitribai (PWv2) grand-daughter and Manbai (PW-3) wife of the deceased, who have categorically deposed that at the time of incident. during some discussion between Geetabai and the deceased, this appellant went inside the house and took out betel axe and caused repeated injuries to‘ him; reSultilig into ‘ instantaneous death of the deceased. Evidence of this Witness f further revealed that Saviiribai (PW—2) triedto intervene then the x appellant also caused grievous hurt to her by the axe. r' 14. Defence has cross examined these witnesses at length, but has not been able to illicit anything in their cross examination to discredit their testimony. Their evidence is well corroborated by the promptly lodged merg vide EX. P/ 1 and FIR EXP/2 and to the medical evidence. This evidence is suhicientfor drawing an inference that the appellant has caused homicidal death of the decea‘sed and caused grievous hurt to Savitribai. criminality, in case of direct evidence it losses its importance. Motive can be inferred on the basis of weapon used, part of the body eEected, nature of injury and other similar circumstances. In the present case, appellant went inside the house and took out the betel axe and thereafter caused as many as 13 injuries over the body of the deceased including neck and while it was objected by l 1 { 15. As regards motive is concerned, motive only aids in 0 his daughter Savitribai (PW-2), he also chopped her leg by that axe, shows his grave intention of causing culpable homicide amounting to murder of the deceased. After appreciating the evidence, available on record, learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as'aforesaid mentioned. 16. On Close scrutiny of the evidence, we do not find any illegality or iniirmity in the conviction and sentence of the appellant imposed vide impugned judgment. Consequently, the appeal being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and it is sunita x’wun. hereby dismissed. ‘ Sd/— Sdl- "T‘P.SHARMA " R.L. Jhanwar Judge t Judge