fy¢§ ' v.1 cyan gm u 1%”) L'XH-1 89 l (Jail) C. “(:9 J. P. » R. 11/94/2,0Q0 @ CF0000050378 a‘ f APPEAL OF PRISONER @ivmo NoWLf§0Q<I Name..‘.&7{.‘g. é? Q7? Residence WW7 Wye} Afge gggg Under section gégizu/Q'O by Wg.W .<. Wew .032 1%??? Wigz §Ta ’v'lu a”? 3‘1 a m/e”. 3§[5€ ‘1? is explaineql to the prisoher that if he states or wishes to be represented by legal Q; practmoner the Ahpellate (‘ourt will not proceed~with the base for seven days unless the legal practitioner appears . If the legal practiti’oner does not appear within seven ays he may not heard at all lf [he prisoner states that he does not wish to be repre-\ ‘ented by legal practitioner the court may proceed at once with the case and will not be obliged to give a hearing to any legal practitioner who should appear . i :t v’ \ L 1 Date of Application for cop}: of Judgement Date on which copyreceived .. . 3 Date on which Appeal sent .. Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented or not — Yes / No 2 4 No.... Name... 95g W3J9£VIEEQ°2W . Q Confined ' in .. w . NoLi3§/@@rjj7~ - Dated-........s.?g./py/199;......... Forwarded to the CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE WaWW%¢;—§ i We 31%) ¢W7$Ic Wei?!) C ate togather which a copy of judgement or order passed in the case for favour of trans- A “3A mission to the proper Appellate Court _ >,W Harte 3:71 NO -J 85/9g.’ (299 N ...... cayJfdll SHermes? {feinmn em, I w ‘ i £E"W‘-o~~<-... J‘ , w d I I ‘ y 1\ l fl .J Date of receipt in... office a Date of receipt record to accompany the [wie g M Memo of A ppea] t0 1he A ].p ) e latC C(HII t .... ...,.... .... ... ."m‘h‘. . . .. ' No ‘ r Dated l‘ 199 kiwi ...*E.J? Forwarded to the ‘\ t‘ ’ 47 Date of receipt in Appellate Court mmmw " As this appeal has been receive Diwsion Bench' Hon’bic Mr L C Bhadoo and Hén'blz Mr Dhlrandm M'shm. JJ -2-2006 When 1he appeal is called auf rone present en behalf of the appellant \lo represenfa‘hon Is made V ' Mr UNS Dao AddrHonqi Puhllc Prosecutor wifh Mr; MP5. Bafia, Panel Lmyer for *rhe state/respond“ . an transfer from'Médh‘ya Pradesh High Court Jabaipurf‘rherafam' than is no repmsenfafion [on bohni’f of fhe eccused/appeliam. Mrs Nisha Chaturvedi’ Advoce‘ is appointed as anieus curiae To argue fhe upped on behnif of i'he accused peiianf The Secretary, High Cour-1' Legai Aid Commntfee fa pass for-ma! 0rd r regarding her appomtmen? as counsei . on behaif of the mused/appellant 5 eiefon paper beak was handed over fo Mrs Nisha Chaiurvedi iearned counsel or fine oppellan‘l' Heard Mrs Nisha Chaiurvedi le rned counsel far- l’lae oppellenl' and Mr U N 5 Den learned Additional Pubhc r with Mr. MRS. Bha‘fia, learnea Panel Lawyer on behalf of fhe $¥alei ponden‘i‘ a Oral judgmen‘l' dicfa‘l‘ea an Owls. Per L C Bhadoa. J - By ‘i'his appeal under Section 374 (2) of fhe CrPC The accused/ appellan‘i hos queshoned *he legalii'y o *he Judgmenf of comm-ion and order [thaw XI-HC-ZZ h r ‘ P a XI—HC- 22 WWWWT3WW. WmaxtmH , "é‘w ' \ > *mm .a \ of $santence dafed 11-7-1997 by a“ Additio'mv Sessions Judge, p , Am:bikapyr-, in §eesions Tniai No.185 $ whereby learned Addi‘riomi Sessions an? guilty for commission of ihe murder m under sec‘l'mn 302 of 'the IPC and sentenced +o undergo imprisonmem for life and pay a fine of Rs.500/—, in default of payment of fine To fur'rhe undergo R I for om month in the morning of 3-3-1996 accused/ 'oppoiiam' Lollu Ram along wrrh his wlf Samyoro Bar worn for oonsummg hquor aiong wrl‘h neighbours Romeshwar Bu dhe (PWa3) and his Wife In the evemng " when Laiiu Ram é” refurnw oiong wlfh ivus wlfa he damanded food from food, +horefore,,¥he accused s+ar+ed beafing Saniyaro Bai wifhrfisf and ki s. On hearing The screams of Samyaro Roi, Nehori (PW-2), her sisfer, came asked Lcl!u Rom no? fro boat Soniyoro Bai' on which 'rhe occused Threo‘rened er oiso and closed the door of The house. Sy next day morning. Soniyoro 8d? Jud:ge after holding the accused/u /of his wife Saniynro Bai. convicfed Somyoro Bo: as sh: was no'l' able +0 unconscious and'by evening. she died. Merg mhmohon Ex P—6 was given by erosdi (PW—1), bro‘th‘er of'Soniyaro Boi and based on ‘rho‘t the Station Hous Offucer, Felice Statuon Sltopur reduoed the merg mtsmotion mto wrri'mg On hams of Dehati Nohshu (Ex P4) £rime No 0/96 under Section 302 of the I *5 was registered and F I R. (Ex P-3} was ' also registered The Stohon House flcer left for the goene of occurrence and after gmng notlce (Ex P-7) to t e Ponchos prepared Ponohnoma of the body Ex.P-8. The body of 5onlyoro ‘ under Ex.P-9 to the Primary Health 4) conducted post-marten! on the i ,, [new was sent for post-mortem exomtnotlon , re, Sitopur, where‘br. .KJC. Dutto (PW- of 5miyaro Boi and prepared the-post- H 1 p k e e t b C I t Wmwafw :53” ‘ WWW WW kw-a'q snésr .e ; moriem report ‘Ex.P-1. The docior opined mo? the death of 5aniyoro Bel was ‘3 as a resuli of comma on aoeoun‘i of heed inJury Affer cmple'l'ian af inves én, aharge shad ms fihd in fha Couri- of 1 Judicial Mogistrofe, First Class, A blkopur who in furn committed the case to 1 the Sessions Judge Ambikapur m where ienmad 2'” Addrhonal Sessions “Judge received ihe case on ironsf r for final The praseclmon m crder- i’o esmbhsh crane agmnsi ‘fhe accused examined sevzn Witnesses 5m? en? of The accused was recorded under Sec‘han 313 of 'Hme Cr P C m which he denied the prosecuflon ewdenc: sfafed Thu? he Is mnocerrt and has been f . The homiCidal deafh of Sam are Bai is no? in dispuu. As far as fhe involvement f the acc‘usadlappcilmf incommimng ther crime in quesfion is concerned, 5y Implicamd m ihe crime. d counsel for the accusediappeilmr argued fhaf there was no ’imenrtio of fhe accused ‘ror causexrhe’death of his wife. When'Saniyaro Bai refused to provide food inarenraged fhe accused, ‘ihen he assauiied saniyaro’ Bai w fis'ts and kicks, therefore, offence againsf i beyond 5ec‘iion 304 Pant-II of ihe I P C 0n fhe ofher hand learned ddrhonai Public Proseeui'or suppori‘ed fine Judgment of fhe ind Couri Heemsai (PW-1) has stared in his evidence fhai an ‘l'he fateful day he was 90mg fo bring wood when he eoched near fhe house of Soniyero Be; he tie/nos A (3 heard fro inside ‘Sove $ove and Saniyoro Bo! was / {@W‘ i ‘ fhe accused/appellant does nof f i o a M ‘ e i XI'HC-22 mum 6L 97 ‘qi‘ 2&9— mmanw‘ga ‘ «4 saying ma? now she wm no? survwe ms‘tde and sound of Mnrpd' was coming 8m were m the house and The accu F {egis He returned 1'0 his‘house Ne lodged the repay-1’ Neharl Ba! (PW— ) has sfwed m her ewdenca fha'r she Is sed on the fateful day §te heard the & Semyaro Ba, and the accused s as a‘result of which she died. Dr. KK that there was eéhtueibn on left side cf the head in the 'size of 8 x 3 cm . ted blood was present in the frontal and was fraature in the right temporal hone and left frontal bane. The death was ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ \ mmx€iwm §7Wm r“ e found that the house was locked from from ihe house. The accused & saniyaro L d was beating Seniyara Bai‘wifh fists 5t day he we‘n‘l' fa ihe Police Simian and residing m the meghbourhood of the sound of quarrel between the ac assaulted Saniyaro Bel with legs & fi Dutta (PW-4) has stated in his evid and swelling in front of the head. On opening af the body he. found that clo below right temporal region and the a’micidal in nature. Therefore, in View of the above, it is established that the accused was the author of the crime in l question. (A: far as the argument advanc has come in the evidence that when accused, that enraged the accused kicks 6: fists as a result of which San' aro Bai received injuries on head and she died Cause of crime was refusal ' deceased the accused «soulted th sudden quarrel all of a sudden and d by learned counsel for the appellant;‘it yaro Bat refused to prohde-fo’od to the he§startcd assaulting Saniyaro Bai with provudmg food to the accused by the deceased without pre-meditahon m a [1% W e e u i