-8C—78 an^i'sn R-<i+ '^«n5?n^r sRTiN? 'SvSf "q|<<|<?'i.M, t$T{l+f'|S, Isjdl^y ^IMdl *Nlcb W^ 200 3ll^?r 'WSK (^pf^^ET) ^nw :afOT sn^i <t>]il<-i4i *<i*«fl('i|\1s^ 'tfSregR '^atRmsii^r HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR OIWSION BENCH: HON'BLE MR L.C BHA&OO & APPEU.ANT HON'BLE. MR'/ DHltREN&RA MISHftA. JJ CRIMINAL itffEAL N0.760/2002 Purjanlal s/o Tejau, aged 30 years, re^ident Bargoon, P.S, Pamgarh, bi^trict JanJ9ir-Champa. Versus RESPQN&ENT Stfff-e of Chhcttisgarh. Present: AAr. B.N. Pandey, Ad.Voectte for t AAr. M.P.5. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer ^e appellant. the respondent-State. Tor O RA L U 06 tt E N T (? ith ,ay, 2007) Per L.C. Bhadoo. J: This appeal is direeted a^ainst the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26t Ju|ie, 2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir in i.T. No.142/2000 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge aftei^ holding-t'he accused/appellarrt guih-y for commission of offence undejr Section 302 of the IPC, sentenced XI-BC—78 311^1 ?B (((-li* ^Tsn 'sn^r aFRit^ 3:EST-^i<<i<?''<<, ^ITTI+I'KO, Rfrti'yy 4tM^t *NI* ••^ an^?r ^WR (iyt-j»<<ta) TBIRR ^lf?3 3II^T him to undergo R.I. for life an murder. Case of the prosecution ^f. herein, his wife Lnchhnititi Ba| Sukhram (since deceased) wef^ incident i.e. 11.1.2000 they wer| grandfather of accused, went to| did not open the room from tl^e Village Kotwar and thereafterj, Pamgarh from where Shri N.4 Station Pamgarh came on the assembled there. When the ac( the door was opened with the l^i bodies of Lachhmoti Bai & Sonu] condition and the accused was h pickoxe in his hand. In the roo(n Kotwar Laxmandas (PW-18) infojrmed the said information was recorlded which is Ex.P-10. Dehoti mert Lachhmati 3ai and Dehoti merg i| were given by Laxmandas. tterg <iftl<<t<TtqlTl TTTO?Tf ^'f^£t"^R^R ^r ajfiiii sn^r l to pay a fine pf Rs.100/- for each in brie-f, is that accused/appellant (since deceased) & son Sonu alias living together and on the date of [e in the room. First of ait, Dokra, the room of the accused but accused inside, therefore, Dokra informed , they went to the Police Stortion I. Dhritlehre (PW-15), 5.H.O., Police ^cene of occurrence. Villagers also ^used did not open the door of room, jelp of crowbar and it was found that were lying inside the rown in injured the room holding the blood stained itself, there was a pit also. Village the Police Station Pamgarh and in the Roznamchnsanha, copy of ^ intimation (Ex.P-12) of murder of ntimotion (Ex.P-13) of murder of Sonu Intimation (Ex.P-15) regarding death XI-HC—78 3^ET rf)i<<K?i<<, »Tflu'is,Rtrtltiy 3ii^ir?ii h-v'h ^ff 3TT^?T ?h*t NINytl **11°b 'Wi, 200 SV^t VS3E (li<<fl«l<ff) TOIIW ^lfel 3D^[ of Lachhmati Bai and merg int Sonu were given in the police s gave dehaf'i nalislii (ExP-14) baSi mation (Ex.P-165-regarding denth of :l-0tion. Shri N.L. Dhritlehre (PW-15) ^d on which First Information Report- (Ex.P-17) was registered.PInve^tigating Officer after giving notices Ex.P-18 A Ex.P-19 to the Panclfas prepared inquest Ex.P-20 on the body of Lachhmati Bai & Ex.P-2^ Lachhmati Bai & Sonu were sentl conductect postmort'em on the on account of cutting of vessel^ that injuries found on the body '^1^i<rt-4l'1 'RTII^f ^fJ^^ <Fin'(^i< ^faifgiTsiiiw on the body of Sonu. tSead bodies of under Ex.P-22 & Ex.P-23 respectively for postmortem examination •t(o Primary Health Centre, Pamgarh, where Dr. D.C. Choudhory (PW-^) conducted postmortem on the body •i of Lachhmati Bai, grepared th^ report Ex.P-5 and opined that the cause of death was diie to sevej-e haemorrhage on account of cutting of vessels of neck and the dedth wos homicidal in nature. He also body of Sonu, prepared the report Ex.P-6 and opined thot the cou^e of death is excessive haemorrhage of neck and the death was homicidal in nature. Blood stained and pltjin soil was seized from the place of occurrence under Ex.P-26. Clotlhes of deceased were seized under Ex.P-27. Pickaxe, weapon of offence, was sent to the doctor for his opinion and the doctor gave his ^ipinion (Ex.P-7) wherein he has opined of deceased persons could be caused by the w/eapon in question. Pick4xe, weapon of offence, was seized by XI-tIC—78 sn^t ?n R-ii°h ^Tsn 3n^?i ai*iiqt ~3^3f '<ii<ii"><<, aTDy'Ko, (ct<fliyy MIN^I *NI+ WI, 200 aii^?r vasE (ijqf^aRSt) ?^nw ^ifetT sii^r the Investigoting Officer prepared bythe Patwari (PW-2). After completion of invesp'ic •ri. Court of Judicial Mag'istrofre Is the case to learned Sessions 1 Additional Sessions Judge rec< The prosecution examined 18 establish the chorge cgainst accused/appellant was recorded he denied the material appeaj'i evidence and stated' thot he| implicccted in the crime. Learned Additional Sessidns of learned counse! for the sentenced the accused/appellarr(, We have heard AAr. B.N. Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, P.L. forthei und|er Ex.P-25. Site Plan (Ex.P-2) was AAr. Pand'ey has not dispir Bai & Sonu. AAoreover, Dr. D.C. 11.1.2000 he was working as M cht<ti<'t*lll ^\H^^^^ <F*f^R ^ aifgii aii^r ip'igotion, charge sheet wos filed in the |Class, Janjgir- who in turn committed jjudge, Bilaspur from a/here learned iived the case on transfer for trial. Iwitnesses at the trial in order to he accused/nppellant. Statement of under Sect-ion 313 of Cr.P.C. in which ^mg against him in the prosecution is innocent and has been falsely Judge ofter hearing the arguments respective parties, convicted and t, as aforementioned. rss F^andey, Advocate for the appetlant and ipondent/Stnte. dispirijed the homicidal deoths of Lachhmati [Choudhary (PW-3) has stated that on idical Officer, PHC Pamgarh, on that XI-HC—78 sn^rv K-u* "^SSIT 3TT^?T shHiqi 3^T3n?n^pr, dixfly'i^, Rxowy W^fil *NI* "g^ 200 an^r inra? Cq?fg?i^) •^iwafeisii^r day the body of Sonu alias Sukh^ was brought for postmortem e>\< on the body of Sonu, there werjt Sonu, the cnuse of deoth 'was el; homicidal in nature. 1-lis r?poi*t, same day he conducted postmoj^ there were 12 incised wounds, column were broken and nature ExP-6 •am, s/o Puranlal, aged about 5 yenrs, iminotion. He conduct'ed postmorl'em e ten incised wounds on the body of Kcessive haemorrhage and death was s Ex.P-5. He also stated that on the 1-em on the body of Lachhmoti Bai, veins of neck, spinal cord, vertebra f deoth was homicidal. His report is Therefore, in,, view of established that deaths of Lael nature. As far as involvement o' question is concerned, there is co.ee and the whole case rests i the prosecution has tried to accused/appellant based on the •f I. That, the accussd used to Lachhmort-i Bai. *i'<fi'f'!il'i Tim?if if_fest <Ritsi< •^ sifgii aii^i 1'he nbove medical evidence, it is Ihmfft'i Bai A Sonu were homicidal in accused/appellant in the crime in bo direct or ocular evidence in this bon the circumstantial evidence and |establish the charge cgainst the tlowing circumstances: Ijieat and subject to cruelty deceased XI-HC—78 75S{ A| 1*11^, yrfl^'is, Rirtiyy ^ HIM^I *MI* sa^s •vsv c^^y) "WI. 200 an^rw (<-fi+ 'cfSTT 3TT^T a>'«Hl<^ t^iiw ^ifta an^r l^ing II. Thcrt, on the date of incidjet where dead bodies were inside and even asking by the accused did'not.'jbpen opened with the help 6f.| accused were found inside 1jhe thct ttle be^rt'ing 1 Circymstance; So far as this circumstante father of deceased, has stated she was married to'-the accuseO evidence dofed 7.11.2(K)1, after born,the accused used to give brought back Lachhmofti Bai to hi^ to go to the house of Puranlal,| brought Lachhmati Bai, she was child in his house. Thereafter requested that Lachhmoti be her, on which Lachhmati Bai aiong of accused in Village Bargaon. Cherichera festival he brought ba( serft •*i!^I<rt14ln 'RTR^ff ^(^t<i1 <Rq^.i< ^affgitan^r int accused was found in the room j, the room was bolted from the •he police officer and the villagers he door. Thereafter, the door was crow bar and the dead bodies & room. is concerned, Bisahuram (PW-9). Lachhmati Bai was his dnughter, 9-10 years prior to date of his marriage one son namely Sonu was to Lachhmati Bai, therefore, he house. He persuaded Lachhmffti Bai but she refused to 90. When he pregnant and she detivered second accused came to his house and to his place and he will not beat with her two sons went to the piace Therea'fter, on the occasion of :k Lachhmati Bai to his house, where the XI-HC—78 3^T ^l^lri-tl, ?5Tfl+l'IS, (S|<rtl'My ^ 7 3^1 ?iT f<;-ft'* TT2TT 3TT^?1 sbHlcb W^vl{ (hNleb "V^ 200 sv^ wra? (ll<iif'l«i<tw) ^wre ^ifttf 3ii^r Lachhmati disclosed to him th mercilessly. 8-10 days thereaft|er, the accused came to his house to take Lachhmati But she refused that he is in the habit qf bea'fing her. Thereafter, accused came along with Jhaduram A Kumar ts not agree to 90 to the house o'f the habit of beating her. Ther^after, parents of accused cane and requested that Lachhmoti be se|nt to her matrimonia! home and they assured that accused will not gi^ know thctt accused has,murdered| Similar is the evidence deceased Laehhmati Bai, PW-12| brothers of deceased Lachhmotil In the cross-examination evidence of these witnesses, t 4)1<rf<t^"ITt *11HCTf Tf,^^ <f:att$l< ^sifiCTsii^r bt accused is regularly beffting her to go with the accused on the ground take Lachhmnl-i, but his doughter did accused on the ground that he is in e beating to her. On their assurance Lachhmoti was sentand therec^fter on the fateful day he came to Lachhmati ond her son Sonu. of PW-11 Chheeta Bai, mother of Bhagirothi iS PW-14 Sanat Kashyap, Bai. of the above witnesses the defence has not been able to elicit ar^y circumstance which discredit the icrefore, it is established that the accused was in the habit of bei|ting deceased Lachhmati Bai that is why she most ofthe times was i^esiding in her parental home and few days before her death, parents <^f accused brought her a!on9 with her XI-HC—78 3^? -ifww-ii, •a-^wie, [sfftwy. ^Wrtl *Ht°b "^ 200 SII^T ^gq; (4?it-j,°it{iiT) sn^r ^i f<;-fii* ^rar sn^r sn+iicti ^arar ^ifCT sii^r ch1^I?l4l'1 'RR^f tf.fe^ <r^-t$l< •^stfinsn^i circumsttince two sons to the house of accust been murdered. 2nd Cireumstance; So far as this' independent witnesses name!y Af Dokra (PW-7), Tijau (PW-8), J| have turned hostile and they Even the Vitlage Kotwar namely report, has turned hostile, at of his evidence that.when the room carrying blood sj-nined cross-examination by counsel the prosecution case and deceased persons were lying Sub Inspector, Police, was also PW-15 Shri N1. P.5. Pamgarh has stated thort on came and informed thot today Pooranlal is not opening the dooi)' open the door only when the pol he is not opening the door, ;d where she and her son Sonu have ha^e otlie rdom a^e 1 f4r std'ed oirilside Dhritlehre theife is concerned, even though the ^ogra Bai (PW-4), Brijbhusan (PW-5), l|iaduram (PW-13) & Dataram (PW-17) not supported the prosecution case. -axman Das (PW-18), who lodged the hand he has stdted in Paragraph 11 was openedtheaccused was inthe in his hand, but thereafter in the the accused he has not supported thcrt when he came bodies of the room covered with cloth and p^esent there. ;, Investigating Officer & S.H.O., 11.1.2000 Kotwar Laxman Das (PW-18) (tokra came to him and informed thcrt- of his raom, he is soying thot he u/ill ce will come and it appears that since must have been an unusual incident XI-PC—78 75Sf ^Wv^^, eixflu'Ko, (s|<rt|^y HIHdl *Nleb 311^1.?il ft'li* ^TT STT^I sti+iiqi "^ 200 an^?r ira% (4<<f-i«<<«T) 'CTdIWfllCTai^I ^^.\fw^: inside the room. He lodged ^ Roznamchasonha at Sr. No.IO proceeded at abo'ut 13.10 hrs fc on the spot, he saw thcrt- rq'Om 6-f the same was got opened with t the door it was seen that bodie on the ground, near their bodies of their bodies accused Pooranl41 holding blood stained pickaxe in his hand was standing. He was eaugt were prepared and merg intima' is estabiished that the bodies ii rooin of the accused, there w| accused was standing by the s blood stained pickaxe in his han^ of this witness the defence ha^ evidence of Investigating Offic^ nothing has been brought in thd ct)l^i<Tl<ft'f Hl*<?lf '^J^^t' <t^t^t< ^'SlRt'TSII^I ^ •he report given.by Laxman Das in which is Ex.P-10 and thereafter r Village Bargaon. When he reached Pooranlnl was botted from the inside, ie help of crowbar and after opening s of Lachhmcrt'i Bai & Sonu were lying there was a pit and on the head side it by the police. Panchnamas of bodies ^ion Ex.P-12 was given by Laxmandas (PW-18). In view of the above evid^nce of PW-15 Shri N.L. Dhritlehre it 1 injured conditions were lying in the is a pit by the side of bodies and de of the deceased persons holding . AAoreover, in the cross-exomination not been abte to establish that the r (PW-15) is not worth reliance. It is true that he is the Police Officer and Investigating Officer but cross examinat'ion thcrt' this witness has, for any reasons, depose<f cgainst the accused in order to XI-8C—7S 3wT -^WIv)^, (Srfly'IS, Rf«wy 10 'Rra^rr **ii* "^ 200 an^r ^ir'tora? 7I1T SIRWifliqi an^?r IRW (iyt-t,«it^T) wgiWHf^rsn^f that accubed ^x implicate him in o false case son. In the statement of moterial appear-ing against him not stated anything or e^lair|ed Bai and Sonu were caused. .Eveb (PW-3) there were 10 incised and there were 12 incised wouitds Bai, but the accused has not were sustained by both the dj accused u/as caught holding blo^< AAr. Pandey argued that the Halka Patwari (PW-2) the| standing has not been shoui^n, Investigoting Officer (PW-15) the site plan prepared by Investignting Officer cannot b^ Mr, Pandey also argued deceased could not be caused we do not find dhy substance pickaxe in question was sent (PW-3) and he has given his r^ cpra[d-ift'1 MW^I '^\^?1' <r^lt$T< ^? sffim sii^r too for the (nurders of his wife <S I, the accused has simply denied the in the prosecution evidence and he has that how the deaths of Lachhmati •as per evidence of Dr. C).C. Choudhary wounds on the body of deceased Sonu on the body of deceased Lachhmati ^xplained thcrt- how these fatal injuries ^ceased persons, on the contrary, the |id stained axe in his hand bythe police. in the site plan (Ex.P-2) prepared by place of room where the accused was i, but in view of the evidence of leven if this fact has not been shown in •he Halka Pat'wari, the evidence of discredited, ^•hut injuries present on the bodies of by the pickaxe, which wce seized, but n this argument, for the reason, thcrt for examination to Dr. &.C. Choudhary iporl- Ex.P-7 in which he has stated in XI-8C—78 3:CTT "l| l-i) 1^1, SiTfl-M'IS, (st<'»iyy 11 MIM^I *t11* "V^ 200 311^1 ?iT R'fi'h ^STT sn^?T ^MTch Roshan/- sn^v iraq; (li<<(l«<<lT) ^giw^itei an^i fr4m cntegorical terms that the injui^ies Bai & Sonu could be caused by t^e Therefore, for the foreg^ing the habit of giving beating Lac^ihmati near the dead bodies of Lachhrhati pickaxe in his hand and the roor|i, persons and accused were seen, the considered opinion that the prosecution has been able accused beyond reaspnable doubf In the result, -wp do not impugned judgment o4 the tricjl being devoid of merit is linbl^ dismissed. Sd/. L.C. Bhaduo Judge 'til'ilirt'fl-f Mlldl' tf.'fs1^ <f°1t(l< ^aifipTsn^r found on the hodies of Lachhinoti pickaxe in question. reasons, that the accused was in ihmati Bai mercilessly, he was found nati Bai & Sonu holding btood stained i, where the dead bodies of deceasecl was boited from the inside, we are of the above circumstontial evidence to estdblish the ch<rge against the find any itlegality or infirmity in the court, the appeal of the appellant to be dismissed and it is hereby Sd/- ^ DhirendraMishra Judge