XI-HC—78 mw,m,m Wm ..gm&..m©...3£. 9\929M/ WW(W) WWW WWW WWEWW mmmm éHWW DB:- Hon’ble Shri L.c. Bhadoo, Ag. C.J. & Hon’ble Shri Sunil Kuma r Sinha, J. 31 -1 -2007:- Mr. Abhay Tiwari, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sudhir Bajpal, Depuly Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. Oral judgment dictated arn Dais. Per Sunil Kumar Sinha J. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28-10-99 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, in S.T. No.18iZ/99 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the l.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imp isonment for life & to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to urther undergo imprisonment for 6 months. The case of the prose ution is that on 2-3-99 deceased namely Singh, who is the husband of the als. The meals were served by their daughter-in-law namely Ramr ti (PW-1). The appellant after taking few breads went away from that pl ce whereas, his wife (deceased) continued with her meals. Seeing this, t e accused/appellant came to the place of occurrence along with Tangia in his hands and gave 3 Tangia blows on the head of the deceased, on ccount of which the deceased fell down on the ground. Seeing this, the d ughter-in-law raised hue and cry, on which the neighbourers came to the spot. Seeing them, the appellant started running away but he was ca ht by the neighbourers. Merg intimation e m Shanti Bai and appellant Vi deceased, were taking their XI-HC—78 WWW mmm WW§WW awarmm £ ~ aamanaw (Ex.-P/2) was Iodged by Ra i (PW-1) based on which First information Report was registered vide Ex. P/1 on 2-3-99. After registration of the R, concerned Investigating Ohicer Ieft for scene of occurrence and on I 3-99 under Ex.-P/8 inquest was done on the body of the deceased. e body was sent for postmortem to the Government Hospital, Podi (B chhra), P.S. Khadgawan. The postmortem was conducted by Dr. R.P. singh (PW-5) and report Ex.-PI11 was prepared. The doctor opined at cause of death was coma due to head injury and was homicidal in n ture. On the memorandum under Section ' 27 of the Evidence Act prepa ed under Ex.-P/3 Tangia was seized from the possession of the accused ppellant vide Ex.—P/4 on 3-3-99. Plain soil and blood stained soil were so seized under Ex.-P/5 on 2-3-99 and so seized under Ex.-Pl6 on 3-3-99. Site clothes of the accused were plan was prepared under Ex. 3. After completion of en uiry. charge sheet was tiled against the accused in the Court of Judici l Magistrate. 1“ Class, Man‘endragarh, who in turn committed the case to t e Court of session Judge from where case was received by the Additio al Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, who conducted the trial, convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as aforementioned. Conviction of the appelant is based upon the sole testimony of Ramrati (PW-1) who is the dau hter-in-law of the appellant. Learned counsel for th appellant argued that in the facts and circumstances of the case, off nce under Section 302 of the l.P.C. would m t - h l l - 1 XI-HC—78 WW . Ob#oo.0&t.to CV - 3 %.??2/g% HW,WW,W Wm<W> mmwm ¥E~ not be made out and this case l.P.C. We have heard learned have also perused the record o1 Ramrati (PW-1), daugh stated that on the fateful day s father-in-law and mother-in-law breads. After eating breads, accused/appellant did not take lay down on a cot. However, ht and started eating; ln the meal a Tangia in the house. came a on the head of the deceased. Dr. R.P. Singh has stated th injuries:- mm WW gawm (1) Lacerated wound in 1 slight upper portion o‘ (2) Lacerated wound in deep at left side; he size of 1%“ x 1" at right parietal region (3) Lacerated wound in of scalp with fracture of underline parietal bone. Pieces of fractured bones haw were present in brain in nature. V would fan under Section 304 Part-II of the counsel for the parties at length and we the Sessions trial. ter-in-law of the accused/appellant, has he was sewing meals to her in-laws. Her both were taking meals. Both have taken when she was sewing rice to them, the rice and he went from the said place and ar mother-in-law (deceased) took some rice 1while, the accused/appellant could search long with Tangia and gave 3 Tangia blows The deceased fell down and died. PW-5 at the deceased had sustained following he size of 2‘ “ x 2” bone deep on the skull i right year; the size of 1%" x ‘2" on. forehead, bone a penetrated deep into skull. Blood clots portion. All the injuries were ante-mortem r.T.O.