l Date 0$Kppllcat10n for copy of Judgement ©l *‘ W \ O‘MRHCN H §(’1 ‘3lat »¢)[ul/‘“l the prlsonersmshes to be terreunled or no No'. IQQ'g/zt 9 Confined inw No. . e W Date on whlch Appeal sent gagb t 7? I l 9‘94 " 4. Whetiher 1 Date of whlch copy recelvcd l together Forwarded wrth to a themm copy ofgtglam Judgement andJorder $E§§E§Z passed m E I Jyl'g e care E'g for gig; ,ii@ &ansntlsS10n 3km! to the proper Appelhate Court l Date of receipt m C J M S Office Date of recelpt of record to accompany the ) The memo of Appeal of the Appellate Court ) iNo. _ l p ted n, C I Magistrate ‘ l t Date of recerLt m Appellate Court t- Da CF00000581 35 i R*" .‘XI1-w2/<Jau) C P R /7 35/500 (vQweh wxCnmAim! / - ; ai‘l V Niggs (43 X wem%w Falhci'sndmc ®@?QV%V fiH x) H Rewdenur ,§Qcbvi§ Age Sentenced @3? to ‘ guk‘w? 3‘ ‘ t "¢ 3“'5%:21~% mra#$ Ewnéw‘m Saga W Q7 ‘ Lo «w i ‘ Jw' a-upm H! a «Ln (ww, 1t practmollmr 1s explamed the Appelate to the prxsoner that If he states or wxshes to be represented by IEgaI the legal paactltloner appears court earher W111 If notpmceed the legal practmoner With the case does for not seven within ‘days unlCSS ’ Will be days, replesented not} hemay be obhged not by be legal to heard g1 practltloner, at all 1f the the court pnsnor may states proceed that at he not once v appear does wrch not within the case Wish seven and t0 ve at heanng to XI-HC-22 grim ‘ DivxsmN aENCH l HcN BLE MR L c BHADoo & i How 3L5 ma aHIRENDRA msaaAg g 7 , I X \ i 20:03 zoos ‘ Sm? Hamxda Slddlqux Advacafa ‘for fhe appe lam? ; , . 5hr! U N S Dee Addl‘homl ’ubhc Prosecu‘mr' for- ‘rhe ’5fa‘re. i grit? BhadoaJ ‘ I {I Accusad/appelian? Hemsmgk @ Pardesl has prerer-rt’d ’mxs appeal ' ques‘honmg Tha !egah+y of Judgmenf of convac‘hon cmd order of sen‘remw dcn‘ed 22.31994, pussegi by learned 6"“ Addl’riona! Sessmns Judge Biiaspur' in Sessidns Trial No‘.E303/§3 wher'éby' {earned Addi?iona! iSxessicns Judge af'fer holding *he accuJed/appemnf guxHy for- commi-ssion of murder of his wife Jankl Devi ’eonvicfed him umier SecTion 302 of fhe Endian Peed Code and senTencecl him 1'0 underage riéom'es i’mprisanmen’r for life. Learned A/ddifionoi Seésiains Judgephae aiso‘ convicfed The accused/appeiimiri de‘r Sec‘rion 27 of ihe Iridicm Arms‘ Ac? and seni’enced him 1o underg rigorous impmeonmenf [or ¢ix monTh-t iond pay fine of Rs 225/- m de auH‘ of poymem; of fme To fur‘rher ' mder'go simple Impriscnmem Tor 312 mowfh “5 r a ‘ Tl'ie prosecuTion case m hm ‘f is 141a? on 20 O4 1993 a? abeuf 6 3O om SumiTr-a Dew (PW-L) lodged V ‘ Om Judgmem‘ drcfcd’ed on bats: l a n -w. reperi (Ex P 1) m fhe Palice Sicmon Sarkanda Bilaspur To ‘rhe effec‘l‘ ha‘l’ he? elder- daugh‘l’er‘ Janki Dew wee n ' XI-HC-zz \ ' married +0 Hemsmgh Q Pardzs: of Village Kimri, P5§ica Sfa‘tion Mcs’rur'i. She has gm i’wo sons and Mo daughfers Toddy a? abou‘f 5.00 am. his . sari—m law Hemssngh 13 accused/oppzllan‘r nerem came To hls house and ,af‘rer waking up her asked her- fo kepp l'ns Two year old dauvghi'ar V lBlmwna, Upon which sha asked from him where’ is Janki (Devi, ’rl‘ien he replied Thai you may go and see h9r a? r’ésidence ihereaf‘l'eh she again asked him as i’o whe‘rher he has illed har an 'rhis Hemsmgh evasively Wplied whaievar you undersiand RaJu (PW 5) Sam of accused H9msmgh aged aoofr 15 years who was res dmg wrih PW ‘1 Sumi’rra DeVi and was hearing ‘rheir conversa‘hon wen inside and sfarfed pu‘l‘fmg on hisr almhes Accused Hemsmgh alsa m inSide and informed Raju (PW §) Thai he has murderecl his mo‘iher y slabbmg wrih sword ir “lhe sfomach . , and shek k a died k spomaneously i l l v I I l l l l l l l l i l l l l i l V l l i l armg This she siar‘l‘ed weeping: Thereafier, she herself, her 9ra dson Raju, son Ramadhar, daugh‘iers vChampa 6’: Radha and one Chhl’ru Paihak wen? ToWhe house of accused/appellan'i a? Ashaka Naga Earkanda and saw ‘rha‘i Janki Ba: was lying on The ground and sword was si‘abbed in her sfomach On receiving ihis repori‘ The Inves'hgai'mg Of icer lef'l for file scene oT occurrence ‘ look inio possessmn ‘I'he sword bl ocl s’rained so'ldi plain sou and broken bang es of deceased under Ex? 2 He also iaok in1‘o possession one receip’r under Ex P 3 Accused/a pellani‘ gave memorandum Ex P while in “(he police cusfocly regarding [Hie W e lower undergarmenl‘s di lungi and in \ \ :xeri e e W ............. ‘ .................................Wa. awn-w 1. r , - qzr_ *Wm XI—HC—22 WWI‘IWW mmmm %,awrmm 4 A pumuance 0f ‘?h"a1‘ sama waMgcT red Panchnama (EXP—8) 01‘ fhe body was mken im‘o posszssion under EXP—9 sen? fer pss’rmorfem examihafwn whera Dr‘ MK; Vermcc (PW-12) ‘condu Junki ’Devi md prepared The pesfr apirxed Tha‘? The dece‘nsed died on ac neck. £ Forensic 3cjence Labom‘fary, Rmpn Pace ived Af‘mr‘ campiehon 0f mvesfrgc Ceur'r m‘ iearned Addmona! Chief Tum cami'niffed The case f0 )earned Xe‘arhed 6“ Addifiohal Sessi‘ons ‘ fmnsfer' for Wick. Tha presecufion in arder Th! learned Addifionai Sessions Judge under 5em‘ian J13 of ihe erPC /n wuch he cenled +i1e prosecu’non ewdence and sfafed Thai he is inno en? and has been faisely implicm‘ed in 'ihe crime. In repiy “m Queen n No 5 Thai he made exirogudicmi canfeseicn before RaJu (PW-5), he eplied The? he informed RaJu ihai‘ [dew lyered by The accused under EXPvé. prepared, ciofrhes of deceased were Body cf deceased Janki Devi was *m Sardar Pa‘re! Hespiml Bilaspur cred 141a posw‘mom‘em on fhe bady of nor’rem reporf Ex P40 m which he The biood sfainéd arficles we coum of asphyxia due fa pressing cf Jr from where repor? EXP—11 we; \ o h aacused/appeilan‘f examined aCCJsed/‘appe lam was recoreed b) re ¢en+ [or chemical exammdhon "to morn, charge sheef was filed iw ‘ihe Iudicicd Magisfra‘re, Biiaspur whoirz Seeeians Judge, Bilagpur from where ge,’ Qiiaspur received fh‘e case on prove “rhe charge agams? The ieen wrinesses Siaisemen? of T r mmm m moe a e smfed by . ' him s d ie h me A ub osé km i sed he ac e m cmd anfenc f cused in ‘Th p due, earned ccLe r he di'iianai Plic hscuor fhe hVp~ ‘ ms fhr hd did buT fhe {fact ‘ I ‘ I , I > { ‘ WW lnrg earnd al Ssr Le Addi‘rion esio ddmanal Plic Prcufor- 64 ar ‘ udgmet V ‘ W hav heard Smf.‘ S cus/‘Gpe‘an‘i and hri e, 5+ae/respon§e. Lrned counsei'fw The c homicid afh s deceased a 0” Jank evi is no? n dispue eyemess iri The as and i o PW—5‘ Qa‘ju befor ho 'ihe a onfession, b -5 Raj 'naé um cuseappeiam made efrajic mder of cn ev y him cused/appei subT‘red hi' conviciin fhe ccu/ppian'r ir no evdence. On ofer h, eae ‘ ihe h and i’r'nd S‘m-ie po‘e Te jdgem o ddiami Publi Prascum for ie Aii c e‘r h iai cauri. Juge afr earing iead cnsei fhe cused concfed inner as en’rioned n Pa- 0f This s m i m1 sed/aeli i nofdispfe “( . ev iherefore ‘ihe idai ea’rh ever, sh argued e? 'ihere is no cuin.case ress on The vidnce c c/apei e T : 'h h Td T ii hfn in q of d nse‘if reche Tere basi - T crime in uesTion, as Ter s uppam dd ’u he Di, , hamic d )w e Th :To f ee f usedpianT mad exmjudiciai d os'Tiie and he as noT sTed Tha ’ caesgie regardg cmmissicn As such, learne coul'or The Thef, h was no s for he q he wa {3" WfiW %31Tataé¥ Thm’ he ma murder-"ed her was m? i jn i - e e ig :acedpii S De A ; in? i ea ac iai de f Jnki i? i D i i- Hz Ewi ce he prs: i $ e wm c b u‘i PW u T: iacd/i xudir iur Jiki Di b iaciam mi 'ra ig dsedaei : ‘ i ‘ supmd h um f tr W :d ou f0?- ac vi iiiq i msi fa T d ub Pdef for XLHc—22 fg", The casz of pro‘secm‘ion resfs orderw‘o convicf an accusec} basa 3hanan§ay ChaWerjee Vs; Sf’afe [Han'ble Apex CourT in The maTTer of 220 he‘d Tha’r; m: W g repom‘ed m (1994) 2 §Ct “In a case hased on Circumsh from which me conciuslon of To be fuliy esmbHshed bu'r c esmblished should be of a con I wi‘i’h The hypb‘mesis Vof ‘i'h 'circumsfgnces shouid nof be of ‘The evidence mus? be s 9f The accused. I? needs n0 circumsTances and noT merely The basis of conviction and mfial evidence, fine circums'iqn'ces‘ guiif is To be drawn have nof oniy lso Thai ail The circumsfances so iciusive na‘i'ure and cansisi’em only guil? of The accused. Those > :apable of being explained by any gum“ of fhe’ accu ed and Jrhe chain 3 comple‘re as not Te leave any ief conSisfen'i' wrih 'i'he innocence reminder ‘rha‘i legally es’mblished indigna'rion of ‘i‘he cour? Can form the more serious The chime! The ’ grea‘ier should be The care TaKen To ScruTinize The evidence lesT suspicion Takes The place of pr 1T is True'ThaT Raju (PW-§ ) has Turned hosTile and he has noT _ regarding making iof' exTrajudicial V suppom‘ed ‘i'he prasecufien case T, biJT PW—é Champa Eai has sTaTed in r—in-law 'i e accused/appellanT herein came To her house he hiT The coT f her moTher wlTh The iooT and said ThaT Take The gTrl ihereaf’i'er > ‘ i ‘ ‘ on 'fhe circumsfanfial evidemce and in l ‘on 1he circums‘rah?ial evidence, The 3 cof." - confession by The accused/appellan her ewdence ThaT when her bro‘ih aju (PW-5) wenTr inside and sTarTed puTTmg on cloThes accused/appell T also wen‘i Inside and sTarTed saying To PaJu ThaT he has murdered his moTher and ThereafTer They wenT To [new oTher' hyppThesis excepT The k I reasonable ground for The be 4A4 ....................................... , ...... ....... V ..............., ...................... mmmw ‘ Igr‘ 1w}, hquse of accused/appeilan‘r. In \ i’am—4 PW-4 Champa 3ai has sfm‘ed ThhT iT is correcT To say ThaT her bhaTher'uimiaw in‘fonme‘d Raju ThaT he ha:$ murdered his mo+her and fhe 5a i e14 cross-examinafiéri, This wifness 1 he was overheard by hen In Para-§ has s'raied Thai when her mofher sThr‘red weeping, she woke up and Chen her moTher informed ThaT my bnhhher-in-Iow i has murderied his wife. When The accused/appeilanT ‘ woke Lip and i'i‘ is incor—mc? 1'0 say smwred‘féHing 1‘0 his son, fhen sha TheT she hadnot averheard when Ti e accused was Telling his son Raju. ad whafeveh was siaied by 'rhe : making of ex’rrajudiciai confession son Raju (PW-5) sfands esmblishad fm Devi Who has sfafad Thai ihg and asked her “i“o keep his fvv'o ‘ nquiry by her aboLx’r Janki Dali, The aw‘ residencz. Whan Sumi‘rra Devi i Janki Devi, Then wcused/appeiianf unders‘rand. Thereafter, she askeci The residence of accused/’appeiian‘i. he house +0 pui on ihe cioj’hes, murder of his mo’rher' wifh ‘i'he' swor said To RaJu ThaT he has commiTTed THer'ea'f’m‘r; This"wifne$s overhea > acfcused/appeiian‘r To Raju. Even fhe, by; fhe accuséd/appellan‘r before his by 'H'ze ‘ evidanca‘ of PW—l Sum ‘accused/appellam came in fhe mom“ year-s oiddaugh‘rer Bhawna and (m a aqcused/appellanf said fha-I‘ she is asked him as To wha‘i'her he has kiHet evlusively repiied fhaf wha'rever you 1V ‘ heh‘ grandéon & 30:3 f0 go ghd $eg aT When §aju (PW-5) wen? inside 1‘ accused/appeiiam foiiowed him and :i‘, ThenRdJ‘u informed PW-1 Su'mi'ira a [new m XI~HC—22 3/,— commm‘ed when me was m fhe house Therea fer“ The accusad/appeHunf fovk ms Two years daugh'rer Bhawna in fhe wee hours To fhe housa 6f PW—l Sumh‘m Dew and handed aver $haf girl ‘m Sumifm Davi and on ‘ enquiry by Sumifm Devi fha‘r as Ta whefher ha has kil¥edrJm1k§ 8m, The accused/appelian’r ’evasively rapied ’r‘hm‘ whm‘ever you undersfafxd. Tiiereaffér, accusz’d/aISpeHanfweanT inside and infarmed his son Raju i’hai’ he“ has murder'ed his msiher Evan Though Raju (PW~5) has Turned a: hosTde buT ”e immediaieiy mfornwd h:s grandmo her SumiTra Devi (PW— 1) aaom The exTmJudwiai can’fess 0h made by Tne accused/appeilan’r and moreaver, ThaT exfraJudICiai con'essmn was ovefheard by Champa 8a: . (PWvifg). Even The ciaThes -of accused/appeiianT were Taken ihTa eossession by TheInvesTigaTing Officer under Ex.P-6 and as per FSL réparT (Ex.P-11),same were faund sTained wiTh bioad. . In View of above circumsT nTiai evidence chain of circumsTances T is compieTe and ThaT poinT Tow eds The commissmn of cmme by The _ accused/appeiianT Therefore we a noT find any iiiegaiiTy ar- mfmmn‘y in The JudgmenT of :r-iai CourT Th appeiianT has been righTly convncied under 5ecTion 302 of The EPC or corxmission of murder of ms Wife Janki Dew and aiso under SecTion 27 of The Arm; ACT In The resulT, The appeal i devoxd of meriTusame is iiabie To be ‘ dismissed and iT is hereby dismis d. Sdl- L.C.BHADOO Judge i gk