Appellant: (In Jail) Respondent 0061 ??6*r ‘ \ Eiviafan BoNncn ' (Crimimu ‘ Cr.A.No.\"l C3 of 19'97 Tiharo éi w/o laeéwNavafgai aged 53 years, R/o Village""Dawna,P.S.> \ Ramanujganj,Distt—Sarguja (M.P.)‘ Vs- : ‘ St’ate of M.P. through- P.S.Rama ujganj ,Distt-Sarguja (MP) Vs CRIMINAL APPEAL. UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE a 45“W BEFORE THE'HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR @ mmmaEa DWISION BENCH - _ ‘HoN’BLE MR Lc BHAooo AND ’BLE MR DHIRENQRA MISH 006 I ‘ Smt Sawta Tlwan counselfc 7 Shn U N S Deo Additional f > ‘ pellant has questioned the lega f sentence dated 29-7-97 passer, by leamed Additional Sesswns Judge _ learned Addmonal Sessuons Judge after for commission of offence under Section I i . A L C Bhadoo, J By this appeal under Sect uraipur in S T No 231/96 where olding the accused/appellant guil 2 limprisonment for life r the appeltant ‘ _ ’ublic Prosecutor With Shri Akhil Mishr nel Lawyer for the State/respond ‘ Oral Judgment dictated on I r ll edlock namely Guddi Dhannapal also kept other lady namely Sahodara as wife and she used to reSIde With ’ C t urpose of stitching the leaves t p o the house of Sahodara leavmg K 374 (2) of the CrPC the accused/ I of the iudgment of convrction and order s / k armapal at his workmg place namely at the native place of Dharmapal [new " _of the l P C for committing m rder of Guddi sentenced her to undergo The case of the prosecution in brief is that Karmato Bai was married I Dharmapal and there was two and half months old girl chiw from the hirmin whereas Karmato Bai was eSiding namely Village Dauna As there ¥ as marriage in the house of Sahodara ' herefore on 19e2-96 Sahodara i vrted Karmato to her residence for the _ used for sewing meal Karmato went to l hind Guddi at her residence Just after armato reached to the house of ahodara, Sahodara Immediately sent her I J ; \ QN I Per t ap h - o -2-2 l I V a Pa i S b h n ~ lto I w {Lac-22 _l,,. Ex -Pl port Ex -Pl10 The sate man p t j c xlpls The weed stained sou and m the place of occurrence under E aken Into possessnon under Ex am sort were taken Into possessron - r fro x i t from where report Ex -Pl16 was recew u § " ‘ \Icrat Magistrate, 1 Ctass, Suraypur ccused Trharo Bat m the Court of w ‘ a- lear ud ned Additlonal Sessmn§a V { n the metg Intimation F i R Ex -Pl2 Panchanama Ex -P/1 of the body of ' onem and prepared postmortem 1 was prepared White In the pence c e e ' -P/7 One blouse of Tlharo Bat and an were taken Into possessron under ‘ I PI5 One broom and one tamp were ’ -PI4 Vsula and blood smmed artrctes were sent for chemrcat examtnatton to the\ V orensrc’ Scienoe Laboratory, Sagar s axe and m pursuance of that! instance of accused Tlharo under - d the case on transfer for trrat ' [dew e l'eC roer Sure} to the house of Karmato n order to’fmd out whether Guddi is ail ht tthe residence or not Aocusedlppeltant namely, Tlharo Bar mother- -w of Karmato and grandmother o Guddt was at the resudence Sura; eLllately retumed and mformed t somebody has murdered Guddl on h the vrllagers collected at the res' ~ enoe of Dharmapal and they saw that udl was lying dead In a pool of bl n In the Pooja room lmmedrately mer atton Ex -PI3 was glven by Sukh a m Sarpanch of Vlllage Dauna In the I oice stqtron Ramanumagar Based s registered Investigating omcer K ruleshwar Sal Palkara (PW-6) left for ‘ i e scene of occurrence and prepare uddl The dead body of Guddl was s‘nt for postmortem examination to the vernment Hospital Ramanujnagar ' under Ex -Pl10-A where Dr D K hwakarma (PW-5) conducted e- Vis ustody accused Tlharo Bar gave a memorandum Ex -PI8 regardmg th r lace where she had kept carpen arpenters axe was got recovered at , l ' After completion of the mveshgtton, charge sheet was filed against ho m tum committed the case to the ' essrons Judge, Surajpur from where re Ex E - e bth rig mIa - Imm h whic Gd g lntlm pl wa th d G Go a J XI-HC—22 §§w fan" m,6\: lish the charge against the accused- exammed 6 wmesses Statement f the accused was recorded under tron 313 of the Cr P C In whrch sh denied the prosecuhon evrdence and sta ed that she Is mnocent ahd has be n fatsely Imphcated In the cnm We have heard learned counsét _or the parties. a. The‘homicidat death of Guddi is not in dispute. As far as rnvoivement of the a 'usedfappellant in committing murder ‘ of Guddi is concerned there Is no e ewrtness to the incident The whoie’ case rests on the cu‘cumstantrai evrde ce and as per the settied iaw in order r to convrct an accused based on the circumstantial evrdence the Hon’bie The prosecution In order to as reported In (1 994) 2 SCC 220 held tha I , “in a case based on c umstantiai evidence? the; i circumstances fromwhich th i conclusion of guilt is to be established but also that all the Circumstances so establrs )ed should behof a conclusive nature and consistent only WI the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused Those circum Ances should not be capabie of being explained by any oth ; r hypothesis except the guilt of the accused and the cha drawn have not only to beful complete as not to leave ' of the eVidence must be so ‘ reasonable ground for the belief consistent wnth the i nwence of the accused It needs no remrnder that Iegaiy established circumstances and not merely Indtgnation o the coutt can form the basis l i l l l g7 gr ' ,of convictionandtthe more ous the crime, the greater V’ ’ b e Q 3 r a ‘ f ' n XI—Hc-‘zé should be the care taken m scrunnize'TiTe' ev‘lmeWéET'm suspicion takes the place of proof " Now, we shall proceed to exa hine the evidgnce available on“recor,d, : j crim’e and'to lh tind question oujt as against to whether the the accus‘ei/appellant pr yecution has based b’een on able the to clrcumstantial establish the i evtdence The prosecutlon has tned‘to establlsh the case on the basis of ? follo‘wmg circumstances - l (l) I Guddi Accused_‘Tihar.e-Bal was'sleeplng, wasall " alone n L‘ at ’ the residence where ‘ deceased ‘ r (ll), Even when Sukhram an others came to the residence where Guddl was lying dead oily accused Tlharo Bar was at the residence ‘ ‘ (iii) When enquires were mad :from the accused about the cause of death of deceased Guddi e did not reply (iv) Pooja place where the ’ of deceased Gtiddi was tound only the g accused used to perform P :oia in that room and l (v) 'Blood stained carpenters axe and the accused’s blood stained ; blouse and Sari were recored b the l O i .on the fateful day on the imitation o Sahodara Bai mother of the deceased §§m8‘ WQ $a 3 5"- to :- cc3 & =- §B 5 g3i §3. 9i 5 m _, sleeping condition in the house att at time accused Tiharo Bai was at the 'reSIdence But it has come in the eVI ence of PW-2 Ramsharan that ounger d : h : y u XI—HC-22 : Euger-In—law and one son of ei daughter-m-law were at the res:dence ‘ apart frQm accused Tlharo Ban. PW Karmato mother of the deceased m 'para 1O of her evidence has stated at Suraj, brothet of Sahodara came to : the resrdence on asking by Sahoda a to find out from the resudence as to ‘ vwhether Guddl is all ught at the resn’ence She has also stated that m the house where Guddi was steeping t re are 2—3 rooms Varandah and there é areatwo doors m front of the house nd m the back of the house She has ‘ also stated that lmtlalty they suspec that Sura; might have committed the offence and even father of Sure] t‘ to give bnbe to the police by offenng Rs 14 OOOI- As §ahodara was issueess therefore she In conmvanoe with ‘ Suraj mtght have tinlshed her dau In para-5 of her ewdence she has ' ‘ ;3 stated that Sahodara forclbty took h ‘r to her residence for the purpose of i stitching the leaves ln para-6 she h s stated that In the same premlses her at brother-ln-law Rampal was also resl mg PW-4 Sukhram In para—11 of his - d t n ' g r 1 v f l evrdence has stated that when he r :ched to the house of Tlharo Bat after coming to know about the Incident h saw that number of persons and family , ; ‘ / members of Tlharo Bar were presen ln the house PW—4 m para~22 of hrs ‘ I § ‘evrdenoe has stated that just after t;e uncrdent orackers were burst m the holuse of Sahodara therefore a sus ’cton was rarsed about the mvolvement T of famlly members of Sahodara In cn ;e m questuon Therefore In vrew of the above the prosecution has utterly fai ed to prove that the house In questton ' where Gudclf was sleeping was in e elusive possession of Tlharo Bai she . was the only person who was presen in the house and it was not accessible» « .3 to anyone else lt has come on recori that even Surat, brother of Sahodara t‘ came to the residence of Karmato t ‘see the condition of the child and he A, has not been examined by the pr ecution to prove that when he came k ‘r. iharo Bai was the only person who was present in the house Therefore, ddht d ‘ ” “ 5 T Xi-HC- 22 resnce this ctrcumsmnce ttsetf Is ' ,: accused wrth the cnme m question. As far as 2"“ Circumstance Is of PW-4 Sukhram Gond Sarpanch about the rncrdent apart from Trhar twere present m the house Even as tcam‘e on asking by Sahodara to the‘house PW 2 Ramsharan has also ‘ the eldest daughter-m-law were t In the house Therefore the) ’ has not been able to establish that material on record rt rs difhcult to dra‘i any Inference that the accused was the author of the cnme In question t As far as 4 th clrcumstance Is cemed It has come on record that where the dead body of Guddl was f ’tnd only the accused used to perform Paola but that does not mean that th said place was accessible only to the ‘ I accused to commit crime Moreover v It Is established that even Sahodara was residing wrth Dharmapal for mor than 6 years and she was not able to con‘cewe therefore there was frustra on In the family that Sahodara has not begotten the child Sahodara gave nVItatfon to Karmato to come to her conclusive in'order to connect the cefned, it has come in the evidence t when he reached after hearing I house when she came to the hous" of Sahodara she Immediately sent Sura), her brother to fnd out th V dmon of the child He rmmedlately murdered Therefore even If the tgeh u ‘n a o j pr; n ‘ ‘n a e - , e t “n ’s ound does not lead to the condusiv ence tat oniy accused Tlharo Bal mit cnme In queshon m the Poqa A» / ' because PW-4 Sukhram In para-6 has that after reachmg to the scene from the place of occurrence apart under Ex -P/4 In para-14 also he of occurrence In other places he i lr r *has stated that Vasula was at the pla 7 rfrom that as per the serologrst’s re rt human blood was found on the “blouse and frock but there Is no evtdece that what was the blood group of ‘ group? as per the report as the blood 1 as dlsmtegrated therefore It could murer of Gudl d d r For the foregorng drscussron we are of the considered oplmon that the qu on based on the circumstantial dence adduced by the prosecution k v Jaw-wk ' The rosecutton has not stood up to f test lard down by the Hcn'ble Apex ' ‘Court connectmg the accused With " crime based on the circumstantial vudence, therefore, fnding of the trial urder of Guddl cannot be sustain f e I r h r m t e g r ie j gm ed. In the result the appeal coeeds sm atlowe Te convmtion and sentence imposed e cusapan c 302 of the I P C are set asude The ' ccuse Is acumed o te carge under Section 302 of the IP C According the accused be set a libery forthwuh untess required to be detarned m an other Sdl- \L L.C. Bhadoo image 1 r i ‘ I: é i V f 3 i ‘ A s s ; ‘ i 3 u and ae ls d h n th aced/pelit under Setion d q f h h t t c