allQtte^||ii§R:Eour^£|l(aces;Gommitleen ImlHK&IM^^tW^^JUMCMFU^^I'^B&M^BMiM: ® Gi malAppealNo.J^^ pR^IINAfcAi'PEAIsIM^ST^ / Oivision Bench ( iniinal] fCKIMINAL PK0(3E0B®E19%^ AppeUant l.^®amffii^t»tTR/S/ttsSltri^flnrBi ^^Ag»dsafc<8iytt;K^s;^J||e%|!^ttg^, ,:PffKBei3!S^tggI|^firmaG-^t'sS S;fiEgsen^:Snfel; tt:Sinit3E^t|]fiEiffi^|:gi; 7Ba»aw|^38ffiSI-)SS ;: ; 1: Stat^tffaC^^ttjrttus KS.Sukani ; DNfrictBantalirttAtM.E.) B \ r '2 XI-HC-78 3T1^TqiTl?TOi a»fT3n^Tsbt|itb 3 r •<<KII<'I<I, y-rflyis, Ric'ti'tiy ^^^^..^..^:^.-../.0.7^^ 31T^?T (RW (yiI^°)t<<T) ??<iRKflfer3n^T Appeliant CRiMSNAL APPEAL N0.1070 of 2000 Danar Bhatra Respondent : Shri Praveen Das, iearnec] Shri U.K.S. Chandel, tearl iL J (113.09.2006$ Per L.C.Bhadoo, J By this appeal under Se Code the accused/appeilant has of the judgment of conviction i passed by learned Second Addi in S.T. No. 345/99 whereby Judge after holding the accuse offence under Sections 302 and imprisonment for life under Sect UnderSection 323 of the IPC. Case of the prosecution, when the accused/appellant Ganga were in sub jail Sukma, +i'i|fc)'fl-i MiH<iTil'teIA<Ri>ii;]< ^>3|1^T3TI^T BLE SHRI L.C.BHADOO 'BLE SHRi DHIRENDRAMiS Vs. counsel for the appeliant. led P.L. for the State/resoondent. jction 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure questioned the legality and correctness ^nd order of sentence dated 13/3/2000 ;|:ional Sessions Judge, Bastar, Jagdalpur tlle leamed Second Additional Sessions ccuse|j/appellant guilty for commission of the p23 of the IPC sentenced him to undergo jon 302 and to undergo Rl for 6 months |n brief, is that on 19/6/19% in the noon naifiely Danar Bhatra and deceased' Hemla ijin that dav eieven inmates v/ere taken to P.T.O. XI-HC-78 *TTOMI fhWvfj 75? -<iWM<<, w-^wie, ^v\wy. ^.A..Mo.lO^'^ 2000 3(T^?ri(^T (ytt^q^'ET) Sn^T^iTf^ITq; cT^TT ^rTT^T $CT^i RcTTm^feTsn^r -2-- chl<ltc1<fl-l WTOf ff fec^t ^srf^q-gn^r the circle ground, for weeding oUI piekaxe whereas Hemala Gang) implement, ai! of a sudden, th4 Ganga with pickaxe three times, as a result ofthe attack Hemala Q, and other parts of the body and warder of the Jaii tried to intenl' carrvina pickaxe in order to assaUi received injuries on his back assaulted PW-5 Ghanshyam who| Kawasi Guddi was able to pickaxe from him and the matter v} police station Sukma, upon commission offence under Secl (Ex.P/5) was also given received the information from th^ which he reached the sub jail dead body of Hemla Ganga in Hemla Ganga was sent for Center, Sukma where Dr. postmortem and prepared the viz (i) one iaceratsd v/ound on left| one lacerated wound on iower 11 vvound continued to mastoid iacerated wound on left occipitai rj dissection, there were muitipte Sku!! bone v/as turned jnto pieces| enl'ene ho^ever catith whieth by Ghans^iyam arjd tlte postmjsrtem redort fr^ctu (t the grass. The accused was carrying deceased vvas working v/ithout any accused attacked deceased Hemaia jsn his head and other parts of the body janga sustained fatal imuries on his head he fell down. When PW-2 Pachkodram, i, the accused ran away after him llt him and in fact, he assaulted him. He ', he vi/as abie to.escape. He also |received the injury on his thumb. PW-4 hoid of the accused, snatched the fras reported by PW-5 Ghanshyam in the the FIR (Ex.P/4) was registered for ]ion 302 of the IPC. Merg intimation .hyarn. Tehsildar H.L. Gayakwad (PW-9) Assistant Jaiier about the incident, on prepared Panchnama (Ex.P/1) of the presence of employses; The body of examination to the Primary Health S. Thakur (PW-10) conducted the (Ex. P/9). He noticed three injuries iaterai eyebrow in the size of 1" x %" (ii) J/3 of left pinna transversaily directed of head in the size of 2" x %" (iii) one •fegion of head in the size of 1" x %". On ires below the injuries No. 1, 2 & 3. He opined that the cause of death was P.T.O. tr XI-HC-78 *II*IMI sh*licft 3^ ^(raraq', ®Tflfl'i<s,Ridiy^< ^U-MQ:.\^.~ID]^O ^rt 2000 3TT^?T((?ra7 (yii^q^) an^T^f^TR; (raT3TR?Ts»i1l<ti ?^TRR:iif?tT3n^r -J- »bi'siFfi<l1-< tiiHdT tf te^t <R|<-<;|< ^isrf^iTsn^T shock with inhibition and severel death v/as homicidal in nature. The pickaxe, plain soii ^ possession under Ex-P/3. The si| Investigating Officer. Injured were alsoexamined by PW-1Q Df| reports Ex-P/14 and Ex-P/13 chemicai examination to the FSL !f cerebral and haemorrhage. Cause of ind bloodstained soil were taken into |te plan (Ex.-P/15) was prepared by the wifnesses Pachkodram and Ghanshyam B.S. Thakur and he prepared the injury re^pectively. The pickaxe was sent for (aipur. After completion of investi^ Couri of J.M.F.C., Sukma who in Judge, Jagdalpur from where received the case on transfer for t( investi^ation, the charge sheet was filed in the turn committed the case to the Sessions iamed 2 Additional Sessions Judge tiai. e; The prosecution in order) accused examined 11 witnessesl accused was recorded under St denied the material appearing aj and stated that he is Innocent i cnme. to establish the charge against the On the other hand, statement of the sction 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he jainst him in the prosecution evidence »nd has been falsely imp'icated in the Leamed Additional Sessiort Additionai Public Prosecutor andl sentenced the appellant as |is Judge after hearing the arguments of lcounsel for the accused convicted and mentic|ned in para-1 of the judgment. We have heard learned ct;unse! for the parties and perused the record. P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3n^T^iTR-)i+ cT^TT 3TT^T ^HR> d© *II*IPII s»»*(rai 3^'^TPTRW, SiTfltf'KS, (sfdiy^ ^.6?:A^.Mto/.%2ooo CT^T'ra^T (^fg^ET) ?T(iramf?(r3;n^r -</- The homicidal death of H counsei for the appellant. Apari| Singh Thakur (PW-10) and eyl Kawasi Guddi, PW-5 Ghanshyar| crime, it is established that the d nature. i-1em tihe As far as invoivement .of is concerned, PW-2 Pachkodraml the work of jail inmates who v/er|s in the premises of sub-jail, has sf 2 p.m. and 11 jai! inmates we\ Danar Bhatra was having picka)' Hemela Ganga was working th^ with pickaxe whereas Hemeia Gj and he (Pachkodram) was stanijl three jail inmates with him an<( ihatra and Hemela Ganga. warden, ali of a sudden accuseti with pickaxe on his head, howev|i accused. Thereafter, the ac towards him to attack him However, somehow he was abl< him but in the meantime jail int The above evidence of Pachkot particulars by other injured Kawasi Guddi who caught holc| Pachkodram. The evidencel tiiifa'fl-f H]*«tTfftec3'<.Riwi<. ^sil^iTsn^r emala Ganga has not been disputed by from that, as per evidence Dr. Bhagavi/an e witnesses PW-2 Pachkodram, PW-4 i and PW-6 Pardeshi, who witnessed the leath of Hemaia Ganga was homicidal in Vl/hen accused/appellant in crime jn question who at the relevant ttme was supen/isins i asked to weed out grass, was standin; ated that he was on.duw from 10 a.m. to 'e weeding out the grass. The accused <e in his hand. The accused along v/ith re, the accused was weeding the grass anga was working without any implement ling at a distance of 100 ft. There were 1 Ghanshyam was with accused Danar Ghanshyam went towards the jaii Danar Bhatra attacked Hemela Ganga er, he saw only one assault made by the ed also turned towards him and rushed attacked with pickaxe on hls back. to escape. The accused aiso ran after Guddi caught hold of the accused. Bram has been corroborated in material PW-5 Ghanshyam as' also PW-4 of the accused when he was chasing of these witnesses further stands P.T.O. iccusled anld inrtiate witrtesses T7; XI-HC-78 Hi*iwr ss^(<*> 3'5T^iraT?PT, ESiTntf'ls, Rlftltfy ^ .<^..A-.AJo:^.7 000 3TI^7T4d* (*tcli^sl'<,iiT) sn^rq^f^N; (raT3TR5Tsb1 s^ciTW^riN'sn^T -~r- P\N eyewitn^sses (F|W- corroborated by the evidence of above evidence of these the medical evidence given by examlnation of eyewitnesses nam|i sustained injuries in this incident| P/13, fhe defence has not beenl makes their evidence unreliabte extent, invoivement of the accusecj/; on the legal and clinching evit Infirmifr/ in the impugned judgment| dsrtce 1-3 Dandiram and PW-6 Pardeshi. The has been further corroborated by /-1.0) Dr. 8. S. Thakur. in the cross- ^ly Pachkodram and Ghanshyam, who as per their injury reports Ex. P/14 & able to elicit any circumstance which or untrustworthy. Therefore, to thls 1/appellant in crime in question is based and we do not find any illegaiity or lof the triai Court. Learned counsel for the nothing on the record to show th4t with an intention tocause his death deceased without premeditation being any rhyme or reason as a'oes not travei bsyond Section 30' As far as intention of the sk concerned, v^here there is no direcjt can be inferred from the facts and the vveapon, place vvhere the assap to the assault, part of the body held bv the Apex Court in the m; Jadu reoorted in 2005 CRi.L.J. Ot! accused at the time of commissi( for the purpose of weeding of th agricuiture imD'ement which js a *l'!|fd'ifl-) t||t|<lTifte<^t<(»i«it ^srf^iran^T ^ccused/appeiiant argued that there is the accused assauited the deceased and in fact the accused assaulted the i|in the spur of moment, without there i, the offence against the appetiant t-110fthelpc. sUch slccused to cause death of deceased is scjt evidence, the intention of the accused ;ircumstances i.e. weapon used, size of flttook place, background facts leadin; where the blow was given, as has been i^itter of Thansasya Vs. State of Tami! >B4. In the instant case, admittedly, the of the crime was hoiding the pickaxe i|e grass and no doubt, the pickaxe is |dangerous weapon, if it is used as a P.T.O. XI-HC-78 +11*1CTTSft*11ch 3^ •^i^ici<i, 81x0•H'IS, Rtdi'y^ ^^:}^^Q/'^ 2000 sn^r^f^fN; traT3TI^Ts»i*< Yogesh/indu \^y^ F7n\ ^ 3T1^Tq?ra7 (^fgg^ST) ?T(ITW flfsa'an^r ~S' mctst weapon .pf offence, and by the deceased thrice on vital part of sustained three injuries and therefore, the above act of the| where the assault tdok place, ii commit murderofthe deceased. rushed towards PW-2 Pachkodr^im he was abte to escape, even th( also received injury on his thumt>, the accused assaulted the assucb., conyictiori under upon,the accused uncter that sec( decedised Sectidn " For the foregoing reason^ with the finciing ofthe trial Courl aforesaid offence. In the result, the appea) dismissed and it is hereby dismi^sed. t)i<if<-i41-i iiticiT^'te^'^RiwK, ^srf^iTsn^r |said pickaxe the accused assaulted ihe [the body i.e. on the head as a result he of the skui! bone turned into pieces, accused, nature of weapon and piace rjtention of the accused was writ large to He did not stop at that stage but he also and tried to attack him also, somehovv in he received injury on his back. PW-5 >, therefore, there is ample evidence that with an intention to cause his death, 302 of the iPC and sentence imposed ;pon is based on legal evidence. ^, we do not find any ground to interfere convicting the accused/appellant for the being devoid of merit, is liable to be Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge Sd/- [ . OiurendraMishra^ Judge II P.T.O. \