anamméafm mméam I wévisian gench: - Hrm'bia Mr. LIL ghaéoo aw Han'bta Mr. Dhérendm Mishmz EL gm-z »2Qeé; ‘ Mr, Ashak Dixif, caunse! fak The appeham‘s. Mr. U.N.5. Dec: Add??ionali Pubisc Preemcm'or wifh Mr. Alok §ak$hh 6*ov?‘ Advccma for :Fha Staw/r‘espondxam Omi judgmem' dicfmad or‘; mu‘s. é ‘ Far L5 ahadao; ii’.‘ By ’r‘ni$ appeal under Secficm 3?4 (Z) <rf The CraD‘Cn. accuseri Lakhan £1 Namyan Pmsad have quesfiarzecl fhe iegaiify cf The Judgmen? of cgnvic‘i‘ion and u . ordzr' of genfence datw 17y“ govember, 19?5, pasgzd by f‘ne 3rd ;kde€h‘iom§ Eessians Judge! Biiaspur, in ‘eSSions Twin! NG.431/19‘32, whamby {earned Addiféana$ Sasaia'nsiudge affgr' hoidmg fhe accused/appe§lanfs guih‘y *For csmmiSsien éf affence unc£gr Sec?§on 302 of The LP‘CV comicfed and 3amencea‘ each of “fhe accusad “o undergo imprisonmem ‘fcr‘ We and pay a fin of EQ£,E:OOQ/g in <izfauH of paymeni‘ of fina 1’0 ,further underga RI. fer mic year’s. .. ' r: The: msa of $‘ha prosecw‘ion, in brief, is 'maf m Tge infervening néghf m‘ 22—8—1992 & 23~8~1992 at 001E hours: cieceasad Premhl dong wwh ims br9?her {:hafkxl, anz Punnilal :51 Rqjkumar‘ lodged vapor? in PGiiw Sfa?i¢n: Chakm‘bhm’o “m ?‘he 9%fecf %haf on 22~$~1992 m“ abet)? 8:36 p‘mA he ww'gming from his huge Ireward$ *rhe pami, Lakhm was siT‘Hng nmv his: house, an seeéng him Lakhan MK. ‘_‘ , N \ e mwmm ammaramm' mmm‘érm a?Wamt smrfm‘ abusing hs'm saying Tha‘i‘ “yuu are levemng fa‘fse ailnagcd'ions agaims‘r ma ?'n&f i am a wi‘rchcraff“ m1 which § xeci abusing him and Siar’red asshui‘img wiih iaihi on if; a §erehaad ham and an baih Jidzs cf ih 9h as a resuii‘ of which miooci sinrfed ammq ou‘i‘ of The miL *‘mm he house bafh of fhem sfar‘ m d'enied. A? 1*hm fima, Namycm cam-5 om‘ mes Hearma Th? shcuis Chm-i Suahmnd & Punmiai came and Mia-varied The Head vans‘rabie offer eniermg ‘i‘he pagan m ‘i’hc QOJ Namcrm farwar-cied Tim Canire, Chakar‘bha‘m’ ‘fnr metiicai examine? Premiai End prepared *rh ihr‘é‘ae iacem‘i‘ed wauncis, abrasions mari’ricaned iha’r injury N051 is Hwiever, injured Premiai died on 'ihg same nigh? a? 3.39 am. and hig body waS V Pos‘r—mor‘iam was conducied by Dr. Vijay epared posimmor‘i‘em vapor“? EXP-9. Thz anci'inama 9f The bcdy' EXP-18. He also prepared gife pian m“ ihe piace of accurrence EXP-1Q. Whiie in poii¢a cus‘i‘ody, accuged Lakhan gave memoram e a‘f ‘ihe memcmndums weapons sf offanca Lai‘his ware recovered ai‘ ’rhe ins’rzmce 0f accused Lakhaa and accwed Namyan under Ex.Pm15 and Ex§~1€y regpeciiveiy, Lafhis wane sam‘ for axamim‘rion by “the regisiered. Waapons 0f offeric< cim‘mr wider Ex.P-22 aw ihe doctor examining i‘he same gave vapor"? EXP—3, V 3 amused under EXP 6 ?o Primary Haaiih examinai‘ionl where Dr. CP. Aagre (PW-7) e injury report Ex??? in which hamo‘iiceci six in number surrouncied by comwions and {wake caused by hard, and bluni object sam‘ f'm @csi-mw‘i‘am examina‘iiori Kumm‘ Varma (PW-8) and he pr lnvegfigufiag Officer prepamd i um tA P43 and amused Narayan gave memorandum EXP-14 in pursuant T SP/FS I a fhg Fm. Expai was \w‘ m §qf§ ...§zzifa.’.!é.§.%¢?.§n “am mwm (W) I mmmma ~ 3 % 1 Affer conipizfion of invasfig ‘ 3'1J1diciai Magésw‘afe, Fim? Class, B "fhje Sessidns Judge, Bilaspur, fror \ mamVi’wW - ' $Wané21 n’ricm, charge Shea? was filed 5n The Cour? of Nagpur: who én “rum commi‘Hed fha case f0 1 where learned Addi‘rianal Saésions Judge 3 . received ‘i‘he case for “fried. The prosecuficn i'n ,or-de’ ’ro esfablish charge examined fwem’y ‘causeH pergans were racorded by Earned ch 1’hey denied i‘h'e presecméon evieence ‘Thc‘r‘r 1‘hey are innocem‘ anti have been faieehf Mdh‘ional Eeseians Judge affer' hearirrg The Prosecufor and couneel for fhe accused fhe 'aecueed as menfiened ih para i 0f This wifngses. ‘ 'V ‘ Sm’femen‘m of fhe a Addifiana! 5a$$ion$ Eudge in wh appewmg agaim‘? ihem am} sfafed' implicafed in *rVhe c'rime‘ Learned , aégumeMS of AddH‘éanal Pubiic convicfed and sanTznced each of judgman‘f. Mr. U.N.5. Dec, le'arned Addi’rior kamed @ovf. Advocm‘e on behuh" c‘ The homicida} dea‘rh cf Premkxi is m? in a‘isppfe. As fares The invoivemen+ of 1'he accused persox‘s in fhe crime in ques’rien is concerned: case againsf ihe accused persons rests an *rhe evidence of 3eushila Bai (PW—1), fhe eyewifness and Chafiai {PW—2), braiher' ‘of ‘ihe >decewed, as also ihe dying deciana‘iion which was made by Premiai befar‘e Head Consiable S'unhar Singh (PW-gr We have heard Mr, Ashok Déxii', learned counsel far The appelianfe and a! Pubhc Prosecu‘mr wi‘rh Mr. Alok Bakshi, 1‘ The Sfm‘e/respondenf. CD14 Iég wm aim W5 (W) 1_mmam#wm§v mawrw . mmam méawf’a'aanéa 1W *9 $ai%qan%91 \ J Learned couhsei wgm’ ’rhe accw {PM/1‘1) hae impmved her evidence be are émiesions and coMrcxdmionsl 1+: came? be corwicmd‘ He also arguet Premia! is coneerned, when Preml’al wc wee ummecioua i'here‘fore, he mm. Lwrnad counset fijr‘mw argued impiicafadjn f'ne crimg. _ Gn ’rhe afher head, Mr. U,N.S and Mr. Aiok Eakshi: Iear-ned (39W. ‘h‘iai Courf. In amen i0 appreciai‘eihe air’gumenfs advanced by iearned counsel for The p‘ar’?ies, we have $cr‘ufinized 1’he sm‘md fha? an fhe fa‘reful day, cfr ab heard fhe sound: came on? of ‘rhe hi grouni accused Lakhan was a‘rftmkir spade :(Rampa). 5m asked fhe accu: inc5c§en+, her bro’rher Sukhnand was 01‘ iliness, She immediafeiy raised ’rhm‘ We accused persom are affac‘ accuséd persons ware geirig inwards There were injurks an 'Irha foreheJ wi‘fnass has sfcxfad ‘i’hu‘r when she c SP/F ifJ: .ed/appe!!anfs submiHed fhaf Sushihz Bai fore The tiourf and in her evidence fhere erefcre, baeed on her evidence accueed i'i‘haf a5; far as *‘rhe dying decim‘a‘Hon cf s Taken m PDEice‘ Smfiom: Chakarbhafol he n01“ in a posifioh M give infarmMion. the? fhe appeHam-é have been fa§3e¥y ¢ y Dec, learned Addifiana! Public Pmsecufor ‘Advocafe suppar'red. The’judgmen‘f of The evidence of Sushikx Ba} (PW-1}. She has cu? 3.30 pm. she was a? her resideme, she :uee (mu‘ saw w‘hai‘ Premkxl wag Mag on The. g wifh axe and Narayan wee affacking wifh zed persons no? to assauH‘ A? ‘rhe Time 01‘ also i‘here, bu'i Sukhmndedied on accouni‘ tries and informed ihe brB‘rher of Premlai <in9 Premlai, Thereaffer, she saw ‘iha‘i‘ ihe ihe wafer mp and Premiai was lying There. 3d of Premici‘ In cross-examina‘i‘ion, i‘his lame oui of ‘i'he house; Premlal was lying on mwm$ C534(éga/°(§Wim mam (93am) § mmwaanéaf -5- WW#%W $Wanw ‘ ‘ f’nje graund, his back was on 'fhe uppw side, moufh was fowards fhe ground, and fhe} accused were a‘i‘mcking him. 3n para 8 she has 51‘afed “l'ha'f fhe accused pagans assaulfed Premla! wifh axe and spade, whereas in para 9 she has sfm‘ed ‘i'ha:‘t' if is incorrec? “2'0 say fhai‘ :he informed fha Poiice Officer Tha‘r fhe accused persans assaulfed Premh! M H‘h LaThL V 'I? isTr‘ue ‘H‘mf We weapons of offence Lm‘his have been reccver‘ed cf f‘ne mswnce of ‘?he accused persons. his evidence 141m“ nn The fai'efu! day he wen? ‘fo ’rhe house of hajkumar 1‘0 Wu‘irching felevision, when fhe picfur-e was ova»; he heard fhe cries cf 5ushiia ai, she informed him fh’a? i:«)ai~ayan & Lakhan were afiacking his brother. Wh n he came Te fhe scene, he sow fha‘i‘ his bro+her was lying on ihe gmund, g tha+la: (PW-2) has smed ‘ i ’rhe sfreef, in from of the house of The accused perscns. Gm enquiry from ushiia she informed fha‘r Norayan & Lakhan ran away afier assauh‘ing his b o’rher, his bro‘iher was uncanscious, and iherem‘ferl he fook him “r0 Paiice 5 o‘fion: Chakarbhm‘a. Ii“ is ~frue “rho? Sushila' Bai i her evidence before i’he Cour-i has s‘i’afed ‘i‘hoi‘ The accused persons uffecke Premiai wi‘rh‘ axe & spade, bu‘i as per The prosecu‘rien case, fhe accused per ns affacked Premiai wigh Lafhis, and Lafhis have been recavered ai ‘i‘he insi'an e of fhe accused per$ns under ExsP-l5 6i P-16, In her s‘im‘emenf before he Police, Sushiia Bai has sfai'ed ’rha‘r The accused persons-assauifed Premiai WHh Lafhis, bu’r her evidence was recorded aimos‘i afier one year, “therefore on accauni' of ’rhe lapse of one year fhis SP/i i / \ cp. A. (622/73 WEWW Wm emam (W) ' mmmme‘r -4) _ , mwqgégmg XI-Hc-78 / discrépamty be‘mleen Cauri' evidence and s‘rafemem before The PoHce Ex.D—1 appeaim 1'0 have occurred. Bu? as per 1‘he evidence of Sushila Bai (PW~1), Cha‘rlél (PW—2), whe immedim‘ely reached on i‘he scene affer hearing fhe cries of PW-l, saw ‘rwis brofher lying in i jured condi‘h‘on, Evidence of Chafia! is admisEible under; Seciion 6 of f e indian Evidence Act The faci‘ of ’ ‘ _ , invaiv‘emeni‘ of fhe amused/awe! an‘is in assauh’ing Premiai is further V . . cerrabomfed by fhe dying declami‘i n made by fhe deceased befere fhe Head Cons‘iabie ai‘ Police Sfm’ion f0 whom i e gave ‘i‘he informafion in which he sfai‘ed i‘hai‘ eccusEd/appeilanis Lakhan & N myan afiackedwi‘ih Lafiwis, when he was geing icwar‘ds fhe peed. The said dy g deciam‘iion of Premlal has been proved by The evidence of 5Lmhaif 5ingh ( ~6) who has sfafed i‘hmion 2.3584992 a? 0015 hour's he wee working as Head Cons‘iubie in Poiice 51’a‘iien: Chakanbha‘i‘é and a? ‘i‘haf fime he mede §oj Nam ha en‘h‘y EXP-5 as informed by Premlai. A‘Fw‘er recording fhe en‘rr'y, he een‘i Premla! fer medical examina‘i‘ion i0 ihe i’rimary HeaH’h Cenfre. in cross-e aminai‘ien, This wi'iness has cafeger‘icaliy si‘m‘ed ihm‘ Premlai was conscious w en he gave fhe dying declara‘i‘ien EXP-5 and he has cafegorically denied fhe uggesi'ion made by The counsel ihai ihe nforniafion recorded in Raj Namcha anha EXP—6 was récar-ded on The basis of he informoi‘ion given by Chair'om K.8.5. Bhadoriya (PW-17) on cross~ xaminaiion by i'he counsel has also fai‘ed Thai when Premlai was broughi +0 he Police Siafion he was preseni' in ihe Police Sia'i'ion, Premlal was conscious nd hlood was oozing ou‘l of ihe inJu ies. In para 11 of his cross—examinai'ian, e has dearly sfa'i‘ed Thai" i? is incor‘ ci‘ 1'0 soy iha? when Pnemlal came 'i'o The olice 5iaiion he was unconscious - at P i . e s‘ 1 1 ’ 24' martian; (War mama; flulé’Qz f ~45 m