F" C-22 an^i^r h-U'h <RI^I sft^i^ •t-ifen 'S^ '41111ct<l, afll^'is, Iqfii'yy 3TI^?T xra^ *11*<CTI g,t,jq,---"---------g^ 200 (c«i<8T' 3H^T ?«ii^T^^<S Cr.A.No. 757 OF 200V [Singte Banch: Hon'bte Mfr. Justice Dhirendra Mishrol APPELLANT (INJAIL) Krishrfa Kumar @ Balla Age 36 5/o. Ram phandrakar, R/o Xurmipara, Maha4amud, P.S. Mahasamund, t>istt.|- Mahasamund C.G. Vs RESPONDENT STATE OF CHHATTIS6ARH, Throu^h The station house officer, Policel stcttion- Mahasamund, Distt.-l'AAahasamund olf 1.11.2007 Mr. Anant Bajpai, , Mr. S. Yadav, Dy. Sovtj Heard. The instant appeal is sentence and judgment passed by learned 1 Mdhasamund in S.T. No.: Additional Sessions Judge) under Section 304 (Part-2) undergo R.I. for 10 years with usual default clause. ct)i<i?<n-4it *iH<-iT'^ is»<n <p>i^,i< ^TSlPOT 311^1 Advc|cate for the appellant. Adv. for the State. directed against the order of conviction dated 31.8.2001 Additional Sessions Judge, 1)3/2001 whereby the learned has convicted the appetlant bf the IPC and sentenced him to ^nd topay a fine of Rs.1,000/- v^ ^k^ '^sws^'' I-HC-22 311^1 q^ h-n'h sfS^s ShH ^t^ft ^- ( '3^ -l<l<)lfl<<, Bfll'M'16, RlWI+iy sn^T TRra? ^" *<I*<CTI ^qjq;—•———••——•——•••—-^F^ 200 fa'b<{(T' - •2-- an^r TS<iiW ^ifro tbe stlirted Case of the prosecutioi is the only son of decease^l frequent quarrel between name of according consent t^> incident also around 9: pressurizing his mother for and on her refusal, he lan9uage and started assaul- also assaulted her by throw|ing face. Incident has been (P.W.l), Kejabai (P.W.9), Bis|iat Ajay (P.W.20). There is overwhelmind that on the date of inciderlt Chhitabaiwas sitting in the| that time accused came Persons present there Kejabai, sister of the d\ thereafter deceased went followed her and dragged hi her hairs and thereafter trield ^Piit<t<i)i *iwflf ^ f^i<il <R>l-^i^' '^'srf^pTgn^r i, in brief, is that the appellant Chhitabai, there used to be mother and the son in the b sel! the land. On the date of \0 p.m. the appellant was giving consent to sell the land abusing her with fitthy ing her with fist and kicks. He boulder over her head and witnessed by ©anesh Prasad (P.W.14), Arvind (P.W.18) & tlliere evidence available on record at about 7:00 p.m. deceased home of her sister Kejabai, at and started abusing her. to separate them, however, sceased, separated them and nside the house. The appellant ;r out of the house by catching s-tjarted assaulting her with kicks / i'S^rt -T'-—— g Wfee-'iz ra&^ " ® ' •vak '-•'fl a s? s 'S^t -qwwi, afll^'is, I««'ii'yy OT^?T 'tRTO IIICTI ^iijq,—————————-———'g^ 200 'tei^a' •3- 311^1 ^T h-u* 3^1 ^fclT^) ^lfgn sii^t TOiiwgfet & fist. He further assaulte< nearby. Version of Kejabai (f\ statement of other witnessl had examined the deceasedl that patient was brou9ht to there was a haematoma pr( sustained tacerated wound eyes we.rs swollen and she He preferred the patient t<| the injuries were caused However, Chhitabai died 4 dbout 1;20 a.m. On her pos| temporal region were n fractures on her head, 4+ • were also fractured and the| as shock due to excessivel injury. It has been further) the appellant allegedly the above injuries. The defence could notl cross-examination of the chl^fo^t ^H<llf'^ fs^ •d^l-^.K i? slPdH 3II^[ her by picking up a stone lying I.W.9) is corroborated by the ^s. br, N.K-.Mandappe (P.W.17) on 24.11.2000 and has stated friim in semi-conscious condition, jesent over her head, she had |over her right eye, her both |iad sustained head injury also. Medical College, Raipur and all by hard and btunt object, jubsequently on 28.11.2000 at •mortem, fracture on skutl and iticed, there were multiple |5th, 6th & 8th ribs of right side cause of death has been opined bleeding as a result of head opined that the Stone by which the deceused could cause assolulted be able to elicit anything in the eyewitness examined by the HC-22 sn^?[^T h-u* sv^y st)*ir<^ yfsa Rl- 'T"? -<<l<<ld<<, »Til'M*i<»,fani'yy sn^?T 'IR^? *111CTI •g^fq;-—————————••———'^^ 200 •I^^T" an^r TOiifgr ^ifCT prosecution, who have fully| <fti<l[<rt<fll *1)*1CTf'^T^t<ll <F<q+$l< ^siptmsii^r supported the prosecufion dnd have narrated the incident ih full detail. ^ Only argument advantjed by leamed counset for the appeltdnt is that the appe and as such he has already lant is in jail since 26.11.2000 bompleted almdst 7 years of jail sentence out of total jail sentence of 10 years imposed upon him and therefore, th^e sentence may be modified to the period already undergor^e by the appeltant. After going through •tpre evidence available on record and the manner in which thej the appellant whereby he most bruta! manner, this Co|urt is of the considered opinion that no modificationis calt offence has been committed by las killed his own mother in a ed for in the sentence awarded to the appellant. In the result, theapp^al being devoid of substance is liable to be dismissed and i1| is hereby dismissed.