-HC—78 ^ 3:5:~ ^w^f, ®-^w\6,Ri0iyy,< ..(h....&.^..^.^.l ^- an^r 'qgw \ sv^v ?a Ri-fi* ^qi SH^I *t|i°b w-,.,.E^s^SsK!g3 h':rt;;^':-^1yF^^ TCiIWtrfSd 3(1^1 APPELLANT: (InJail) - Vdrsus - RESPONDENT: {Criminal appeal under Section 374 1$73} Division Bench: Hon'ble Mr. L.C. Bhadoo and Hon'ble Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, J 17-1-2 Mre. Savita Tiwari, counsel fci Mr. Arun Sao, Govt. Advocat^ Oral judgment dictated on Da| L.C. Bhadoo, J: - The accused/appellant has pr< Superintendent, Centrat Jail, Anjibikapur conviction & order of sentence Additional Sessions Judge (F.- No.155/2002, whereby the accus^ commission of offence under Secti4in cbi'ifd'iil-l 'WRlf ^felSt ^ftl^lT ^sfRn aii^i Bheema @ Bheemsai Kanwar, /^ed about 35 years, S/o Bhooian Sai, Occupation: Agriculture, R/o Maini.PS: Bagicha, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Bagicha, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 2) ofthe Code of Criminaf Proeedure, the appellant. for the State/responctent. IS. 'ferred this appeal through the against the judgment of c|ated 29-1-2003 passed by the 2m f.C.), Jashpur, in Sessions Trial .^d/appellant has been convictect for 302 of the t.P.C. and sentenced to .,.^£-^^^-., f.f^ ^h, f^^ w^; 1 '•LL^ '•:is 3^E[ "4i4lri>4, ®TFi'y'[S,RfWK-fyi .Q£:A.:...^.O./...^ 3W^P 1RSIT ( 3H^I ^I R-li.'* 'tPff SSKW siiHlti SS N;y^i?:;:;:?asSsEta •^•s^s^ 'FRIHIT'BftSSB^f ahd undergo imprisonment for life payment of fine to furthgr underg^ As per the Office report, there is ^elay of 481 days in filing this appeal. We have heard learned coOns^l fl condonation ofdelay in filing the 4 Having heard learned counsel forj|the parties, we have perused the record. Case of the prosecution is that ov\ p.m. accused Bheema @ Bheen^ai said that she is practicing witchc^ hairs and attacked her with the ake sustained incised wound on necW the deceased, the accused ran avj Elai The matter was reported by Mi information report (Ex.P-1) was recorded. The Station House Offit Singh (RA/-10) took up investig^ prepared inquest Ex.P-3 on the b<| EX.P-9A sent the body of Munni Centre, Bagicha. Dr. C.D. Bakhls body of Munni Bai and noticed zygomatic bone. There was anotljier the ear. Lobule of teft ear was muscles were also cut. The injur^ 11 cms. Cervical bone was alsol 4>E4Jd4l'1 'RTTRTf ^T,^^ ^^1-^R ^TSTfgqsifer pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of simple tmprisonment for five months. for the parties on the appiication for ppeal as well as on merits of the case. 1-5-2002 In Village: Maini at about 4.30 ^ai went to the house of ^4unni Bai and 1-aft, therefore, he caught hold of her by on her neck as a result of which she Leaving the axe stuck on the neck of ?ay. |kund Sai (PW-1), whereupon the first re]gistered and merg intfmation Ex.P-2 was i{;er, Police Station: Jashpur namely, J.P. i^ition, left for the scene of occurrence, )<j>dy of Munni Bai and on 2-5-2002 under E|ai for post-mortem to Community Health (PW-9) conducted post-mortem on the pncised wound on left side behind ttie ineised wound in the upper part near t;ut in the middle and sfsrnum mastoid was in the slze of 7 cms. x 1 % cms. x Ibroken. On accourit of above injuries, iSS"*.;,,,^ ;»-tt"^i-HC—^ "'" E %^./ ;T.3. .-Fi?" ^esf «i|i<)i^Ai,siTfl^'Ko, Rf0iyy &,<\.^^0/ ^ siit?T 'wy; ( \ sn^sf ?!T Ri'ii'* ^an sn^r sci^i^ »....•-i.;S^^1®^ g^-::.ah-:s®i§S|S> i^S: ••\—•'"••" •" "^•':'~--.^xiy excessive bleeding and haemoijrhage respiratory failure. He preparejd Officer prepared site plan Ex.P'l The Patwari prepared site plan Ef(. After completion of investi^atiorj, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, case to the Sessions Judge, R^i Sessions Judge received the easje j, charge sheet was fited in the Court of [Jashpurnagar who in turn eommitted the jigarh, from where teamed 2nd Add'rtional on transfer for trial. $. The prosecution in order to examined 12 witnesses. Statenjient Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in against him in the prosecution has been falsely implicated in th^ Learned Additional Sessions parties, convicted and sentenced the 10. We have heard Mre. Savita Tiw^ri, Mr. Arun Sao, learned Govt. Advt>cate .1 Learned counsel for the appellartt Munni Bai. Morepver, Mukundl witnessed the crime in questfon evidence that they saw that the her neck and ran away. Abov^ medical evidence of Dr. C.D. evidence that on 2"° May, 2002, cbi<4[<n41Ti/it^^* ^f^t ii^t^R. ^ 3T{?R 311^1 ttie deceased died due to cardio the report Ex.P-9. The Investigating 11. He seized the axe under Ex.P-12. <.P-5. lestablish charge against the accused of the accused was recorded under ^hich he denied the material appearing \jridence and stated that he is innocent, he crlme. Ju|dge after hearing counsel for respective accused as aforementioned. i, learned counsel for the appellant and for the State/respondent. has not disputed frie homicidal death of ISai (PW-1) & Balmiki Sai (RA/-2), who have categorteally stated in their laccused attacked Munni Bai with axe on ocular evidence ig corroborated by the IBakhta (PW-9) who has stated in his |ie conducted post-mortem on the body of .XIfiIC—78 -FE3i ^m^^, •a-fww, (st0iyy .Q£:A:.....S.io..l..Q. "^ 3II^5T iraw (ij^f^RtT; sn^r ?ii R-<i<* "^sn 3TT^?T ?bH!ch ^RIIWtlftS Wtw <^i^i<ri^'irt Tfpraf T?,'f^E£t'<^t^l<, '^aifgiTsil^T Munni Bai, there was an incisejd wound on left side behind Zygomatlc bone, lobule of the ear' was cuf into two pieces and ctotted blood was present. First incised wound w^s in the size of 7 cms. x 1 % cms. x 1 cms. & second ineised wound wfes in the size of 7 cms. x 1 % cms. x 11 cms. on the left side of n^fck ^hereby the mastoid muscles were cut. Cervica! bone at the level pf 3f & 4 vertebra was broken. Both the injuries were ante-mortem in na^ure and caused by hard & sharp object. Cause of death was injuries ajs a result of haemontiage and cardio respiratory failure. In view of the] above, it is established that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nWure. 2. As far as complicity of the accusjed in the crime in question is concerned, learned counsel for the appellanlj argued that ttie evidenee of Mukund Sai (PW-1) & Balmiki Sal (PW-2) is |iot worth reliance, as they have not saw the accused while attacking Muni 3. On the other hand, tearned Govt trial Court. 4. We have perused the evidence o 2). Mukund Sai (PW-1) has ca ii Bai. Advocate supported the judgment of the f Mukund Sai (PW-1) & Balmiki Sai (PW- tegorically stated in his evidence that at about 4 p.m. he went to bore we|l for fetching water, house of Budhia Sai is there near the bore weil, his ^ouse is also there, he heard ttie cries of Munni Bai that she will not survivje, he rushed towards the house of Munni Bai, his nephew Balmiki also canjie there, he saw that accused Bheem Sai was holding Munni Bai by hairs s^id attacked her with the axe on her neck, thereafter, the accused ran ^wa^. The aceused attacked Munni Bai on heLneck by sharp side of the ^ixe. Thereafter, he informed Sarpanch XI-HC—78 3rcT ^WWif, 'QT^WW, Rlrtl'My <3?..,A.:.A. 3li^?T<FRW (ipf^g^g; 4~ 3n^?I VI h-U'h ^S!TT ^TI^fT 5h*11cf. ^i^®. :-;jE!S;^SEiB liE ij' ••'::.- "-ii,S^! L^i^! 15 16 wiiwafef aiii^i SuKndev. Budhia Sai, husband of Sagar to whom also they have in' reported at Police Station under Ex |the deceased, was working with Vidya lormed and thereafter, the matter was fp-1. Above evidence of Mukund Sai evidence of Bafmiki Sai (R/V-Sf), in his evidence that he saw the In cross-examination of these discredit their evidence or there is have any grudge or bias against th' false case. There is nothing in evidence of these witnesses nothing to disbelieve the evidenc Therefore, from the evidence of that the accused was the person on her neck. th4ir In the cireumstances, we do not hereby dismissed on merits as wet Soma delay of 481 days in filing thfs appe^l. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge qiFifepfrT timaf tf.fsizt ^ftn^K ^T 3lRlH 3iI^T (pW-1) has been corroborated by the soji of the deceased, who has also stated acc|jsed attacking his mother with the axe. witrlesses, defence has not been able to (lothing on record that these witnesses accused in order to implicate him in a cross-examination whfch makes the unr^liabte and untrustworthy. There is of these two natural eyewtnesses. th^se two eyewitnesses, (t is estabfished who attacked the deceased with the axe flnd any illegality or infirmiiy in the judgment of the trial Court convicpng & sentencing the accused under Section 302 ofthe t.P.C. for committing the murder of Munni Bai, as such, there is no merit in this appeal, s^me is liable to be dismissed and it is as on the ground of delay, as there is Sd/- SuniIKumarSinha Judge