HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'ble Shri Raieev Gupta. C.J. & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Criminal Appeal No. 1389of 1994 Karamsai S/o Ramsai Basod Turi, aged 30 years, R/o Village Batati, P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh (M.P.) (Now Chhattisgarh) Versus State of Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh) Through P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh APPELLANT RESPONDENT And Criminal Appeal No. 1420 of 1994 Lalku S/o Ramsai Basod Turi, aged 25 years, R/o Village Batati, P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh (M.P.) (Now Chhattisgarh) Versus State of Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh) Through P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh (Criminal Appeals under Section 374 (2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) Appearance: Mr. Abhay Tiwari, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State. BIBHUTI PRASAD Digitally signed by BIBHUTI PRASAD Date: 2025.02.05 11:48:44 +0530 Criminal ApDealsNo. 1389 of 94 & 1420 of94 JUDGMENT (/0.09.2010) Following judgment of the Court was delivered by Sunil KumarSinha. J. (1) These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 9 of August, 1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 209/93, by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh. (2) By the impugned judgment, appellant- Karamsai has been convicted u/s 302 IPC and appellant- Lalku has been convicted u/s 302/34 IPC and both have been sentenced to undergo R.l. for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.l. for one year. (3) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:- Deceased- Bituram, Langdy Ram (PW-4) and Ramsai were real brothers. The appellants are the two sons of Ramsai. An old land dispute was going on between the appellants and deceased- Bituram. In this connection, earlier also, Karamsai had attempted the life of Bituram, for which, Sessions Trial No. 22/87 was prosecuted, in which he was convicted for two years. After undergoing the above sentence, when he came out from jail, the land dispute still continued. The disputed land was in three plots. The appellants had sown paddy crops in two plots and one plot was vacant. The incident took place when deceased- Bituram went for sowing the said plot. On 21.6.93 at about 6.00 a.m. when the deceased went to the plot, the appellants were present there having bow & arrows with them. Appellant- Karamsai was also '•^^^^ Criminal Appeals No. 1389 of94 & 1420 of94 armed with a pharsa (tabbal}. Firstly they shot an arrow on the deceased. The deceased ran towards the field of Janbandhu Ram (PW-9). He fell down near the field of Jangbandhu. The appellants were chasing the deceased. When the deceased got up and saw towards back, appellant- Karamsai again shot an arrow which hit on the chest of the deceased. The deceased again fell down on the field. The deceased was holding an axe. Appellant- Lalku tookthe axe ofthe deceased and attacked over his chest by axe. Appellant- Karamsai assaulted on the neck of the deceased by pharsa. The deceased received multiple injuries and succumbed to those injuries on the place of occurrence itself. Thereafter the appellants came to the village and tried to assault the wife of deceased-Sita Bai (PW-3), but she ran away. The appellants then shouted in the village that the persons who went to take partition should come before them. This was heard by Bazru (PW-5) and Sukhram (PW-6). The incident was witnessed by Jagbandhu (PW-9), Chitru (PW-11), Chandrashekhar and Chiru. The matter was reported to the concerned police station by Jagbandhu (PW- 9), on which, the First Information Report (Ex.-P/10) was registered. A merg intimation (Ex.-P/11) was also registered. The Investigating Officer reached to the scene of occurrence, gave notice (Ex.-P/1) to the Panchas, and prepared inquest (Ex.-P/2) on the body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem examination to Primary Health Centre, Patthalgaon. The post-mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Kailash Dutt (PW-12) who prepared his report Ex.-P/20. He noticed the following external injuries on the body of the deceased:- (i) A depressed jncised wound 2 inch x 3 1/^ inch on left side of the chest having pierced arrow in it; ^^^ re^ .4•^^ Criminal Appeals No. 1389 of94 & 1420 of94 (ii) Incised wound 6 inch x 3 "^ inch x 4 1/^ inch on the left portion of the neck. Muscles and blood vessels were completely cut; (iii) Incised wound 1 inch x.1/^ inc x 1 1/^ inch on the right lower portion of neck; (iv) Incised wound 1 inch x 1/z inch x 1 inch on the hip; (v) Incised wound 1 inch x1/^ inchx 1 inch on the right thigh On internal examination, he noticed the following internal injuries:)- (i) There were incised wounds of the size of 1 inch x 1/2 inch and 1 inch x 2 inch on the left lung; Left side of trachea was completely cut; Huge amountof blood was found in thoracic cavity; Left portion of heart was cut; Left carotid and Jugular veins were completely cut & (vi) The arrow has pierced into portions of left lung and muscles of heart to the depth of 1 inch x 1^inch. The Autopsy Surgeon opined that all the injuries were ante-mortem. The cause of death was haemorrhage and injuries to the vital parts of the body and the death was homicidal in nature. In further investigation, the appellants were taken into custody and their memorandum statements/discovery statements u/s 27 of the Evidence Act were recorded. The discovery statementofKaramsaiisEx.-P/15. One bow, three arrows and one tabbal were seized at the instance of Karamsai vide seizure memo Ex.-P/16. Some cloths were also seized vide Ex.-P/17. The discovery memo of Lalku is Ex.- P/12. A tangia was seized at the instance of Lalku vide (iii) (IV) (V) Criminal Appeals No. 1389 of94 & 1420 of94 seizure memo Ex.-P/13. The seized articles were sent for chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur, from where, a report Ex.-P/25 was received. According to the F.S.L. report, blood stains were found on the weapons and cloths of the accused persons. (4) The case of the prosecution was based on the eye-witnesses account of Jagbandhu (PW-9) and Chitru (PW-11). (5) Mr. Abhay Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appeltants, argued that the eye-witnesses are not reliable, therefore, the conviction based on the above eye-witnesses cannot be sustained. (6) On the other hand, Mr. Akhil Agrawal, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the State, opposed these arguments and supported the judgment passed by the Sessions Court. (7) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records of the sessions case. (8) Jagbandhu (PW-9) deposed that on the fateful day, he was working in his field. Chandrashekhar and Chiru were also present with him. He saw that Bituram was running from his field and the appellants were chasing him. They were armed with bow, arrows and tabbal. Bituram had received some injuries. His cloths were blood stained. Bituram reached to them. The appellants also reached there. They said the appeltants not to assault him, but the 6 Criminal Appeals No. 1389 of94 & 1420 of94 appellants did not hear and shot arrows by bow on the deceased. Thereafter Bituram started running away but he fell down. When he got up and tried to run away, Karamsai shot an arrow on his chest. Bituram fell down there. Lalku assaulted him by tangia and thereafter Karamsai assaulted Bityram (deceased) by tabbal on his neck. The neck was almost cut. (9) The above version of PW-9 is supported by the version of Chitru (PW-11). Though he has not given the details,but he deposed that the appellants were chasing the deceased. The appellants were assaulting him by bow and arrows. He had seen the appellants assautting the deceased. (10) The version of (PW-9) is corroborated by the contents of the F.1. R. (Ex.-P/10), in which, he has stated the story taking the names of the appellapts. His version is further corroborated by the contents of the post-mortem report in which almost all corresponding injuries were found by the Doctor. Though these witnesses have been put to lengthy cross-examinations by the defence, but the defence has not been able to elicit any such circumstance, on which, either their testimonies may be discarded or it may be said that they were falsely implicating the appellants in this case. We have gone through the entire evidenceof these witnesses. On due appreciation, we are of the view that the Sessions Judge has rightly relied on the testimonies of these witnesses and has rightly held that the >a 4 '^ Criminal Appeals No. 1389 of94& 1420 of94 appellants assaulted the deceased in the above manner and they were liable for punishment under the aforementioned Sections of IPC. (11) Mr. Tiwari has also argued that the appellants acted in right of private defence of their property, therefore, they were not liable for punishment u/s 302 or 302/34 IPC. We find in the evidence of Jagbandhu (PW-9) that out of three plots, the two plots were in cultivating possession of the appellants, whereas, the dpceased was in possessions of the 3rd plot for which the incident took place. He has categorically admitted in Para-6 of his cross-examination that the deceased was holding the possession of thesaid plot. We also gather fronr) the evidence of Sita Bai (PW-3) that her husband (deceased) had gone to the field to bring ptough (Nangar) which was lying on the said field. This also supports the version of PW-9 that, in fact, the said plot was in possession of the deceased on the date of incident. When the appellants were not in actual physical possession of the land on the date of the incident, the right of private defence of property would never arise in their favour. In fact, it was a case of murder on a land dispute. Looking to the manner in which the appellants assaulted the deceased and further looking to the injuries sustained by the deceased, we are of the opinion that the Sessions Judge rightly convicted the appellants u/ss 302 & 302/34 IPC. ^ ..-././ Cdminal AppealsNo. 1389 of94 & 1420 of94 (12) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in these appeals. The appeals are liable to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed. It is stated that the appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled. They are directed to surrender immediately to serve the remaining sentences imposed against them. ^ vattl Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^