/?'> -.„'! |G-;1">1 UtJ.toM xx^8L.6EjyiMAmsgARHj_Bi Lr^m^l ADD^^I No.Dil OT ^Ui Stqte o4- Chhattisqarh 'Ub-SMENT FOR CONSI&EftA'TlON HON'BLE SHM JUSUC£T.P. SHA Si L.C. Bhaduo Judge Sd/- T.P. Shanna Judge ^. K:'N;tt:!;».r' POST FOR JUD6MENT ON/3AAAARCH.200i LC.Bhadoc jiidge „ ^.// '^i,.^.y::y "'•^'SS-S'"' M'rcU r ^ ;H COURT OF CHHATTIS&4RH : BlLASPi (S! ® ?IS^Q^ n'bla Shri L.C. Bhodi T.F. 'imina] f.m h^S^ AoDellant : i.*n ^aii) Bnsram, aged about 31 years, S/o Budhram, by caste Teicnga, R/o Satuba, Schoo! Para, Police Station Bhairamgarh, Diatrict Dantewada VerfiL ftesDon£i>2!"it : State of Chhotti: foiice watwn Bnairamqarn, UisTriCT rs.^,^A-.,..,^J.^ ^r'j'"i.\ 't^ijsi le.vy^uu ^0'";* iCriminal ADoeai under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.) Present ;- Shri M.K. Baea, counset for the appellant. Shri Rakesh Jha, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. dl-u.:& %ss..^ Tt-> (beiiyered on_/_3__ /Aarch. 2008) Fhe folbwinQ iudqmsnt of the Court was dsl'yered by -» u~'~'.»' 1 r r L.L. unaaoo, J This aooeal ia directed caainst the iudament ot conviction G>'d oridsr Os ssn't'sncs dci't'^d 7'~1'~2003 QQ.sss-'d IDV 't'h®^' ^^cilTloriol Ssssic'ns Judgs, Fost Track L'ourt, Bqsta" et Jagdclpur in sessions triG! No.97/2001 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding the accussd/aDoeilant Quiitv fc-r comrr.ission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penct! Code and Seetions 25(lB)(b) •i. 27 of the Arrns Act, ssnteneed him to underqo imprisonment for !'fe, to further undergo R.I. for 1 yea" and to undergo R.I. for 3 years, p.espectively. It •further directad that c!J the ssntences shall run concurrently. ^ .•-?•' iiia- 2i Case o" the "rosecutio''] i" or'e''" 's tha" on 30-32-2000 K.orsa: Ayutu © Itwari (sincs deceQsed) a'ong with h's wife "an"ety, !(o"sa Kate and accused/appeiiant ncrneiy, Basran' wsnt to the weel<ly ma"ket of Tumnar. When ai! the threer persons we.re. returning from market in the eveninc and when they were at a little distance from the house of Ayutu, a!l the three persons drunk the Juice of salfi t"ee. Thereafter, the Gccused asked Ayutu that he is in the habit of committina theft of salfi juice from his tree, started qugi''reling and attacked with a knife on his neck, as a resu!t of which Ayutu fetl.'down and blood started oozing out of the neck injury. The wife of Avutu namely, Korsa Kate (PVV-1) raised criea. The accused flee fcom the scene of occurrence and went towards the forest. Korsa Kate took her husband in the courtyard of her house cnd Avutu succumbed to the iniuries. Therefore, Korsa Kate informed the villaQsr's aboLjt the mcident. Next d£2v the Panc^avat was convsned and the Panchoyat advised Korsa Kote to lodge the reoort ir; Police Stction, thersfore, on 1-1-2001, Kora Kate iodged the report in the Police Station BairGmqarh. S) The Stotion House Officer, Police Station BairamgQrb; registered the merg in+imatio" (Ex.P/2) &. First Information Raport (Ex.P/1) and Ss'i t for the scene of occurrence. 'rie pr'epared sita plan of +he p'ace of occurrenca under Ex.P/3. Biood stained soil, Dlain soil and one rnisit were seizsd from the pface of occurrence under Ex.P/4. The knife i.e. the weaDon of offence was seized under Ex.P/10. The blood stained underwear of the accused was seized. After giving notice (Ex.P/11) to the Ponchas, inquest (Ex.P/12) was prepared on the body of deceased. The ciothes of the deceased were seized under E:x.P/9. The body ot Avutu wos sent tor DosTmortern examination to Communi'h/ h-iealth Centre, Baira>ngarh ynder Ex.P/13 where Dr. Sendram (PW-5J conducted pos+mortem end oDined that the cause of death was excessive bieeding as a result of cutting of left sids of artery of neck by hard <& shorp s&ils'|iS4^ weaoon. Injurv w-as on+e Tiortem in Ex.P/18. D< tr'.ortem r'eDort is 4) After' comDietion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the • ; ^ • ^ Cour't of JudiciGl AAaGistrate, First Class, bantewada, who in turn committed the casa to the Court of Sessions Judae Bastar at Jsgdalour, from whe.rs leQrnsd ^dditiOPQl Ssssions JudQe, Basto.r' ot >Toadainur received -f-he scme on transfer tor triai. 5) In order to estqbiish charges against the Gccused/appeliant, the •'f- prosecution examined 5 witinfesses. Stotement of the accused./'appeiiant \. waa recorded under Section' 313'of the Cr.P.C. in which hs denied the waterial cppearing against him in the prosecution evidence. He stated that he is innocent and has been falsely imp!icated in ths instant crime. 6) Learned Additional Sessions Judge after hearinq counsei for the resosctivs oarties, convicted and sentenced the occused/aoDe1 iant as Ti 7) Vv'e have heard Shri AA.K. Baeg, IsQrned counsei for' the appeilant and Shri Rakesh Jha iearned Dv. (Sovt. Advocate for the State. 8) Shri 8020 ieorned counssl toi' the accused/aoDellant, has not disDUted the homicidal dsath of Ayutu. AAoreover, PVi/-l Korsa Kate. v^ife of the deceosed, has stated that on the fateful day, she o.'wny with hs" husbcnd (since deceased) & accused went to the weekiy market, when "hey were returning, they stayed near the salfi tree, which was standing neac their house and at that place accused attacked her husband with the knifs o" the nsck. The above eyidence is corroborated by the evjdence of &r. Sendram (PW-S), who has stated that on 1-1-2001 he conducted oostniorte>n on the body of Avutu and thers WQS an in iun/ on the !eft side of the neck in the si2e of 3" x 24-" x l-i-", edoes were clean cut & marains were reouiar. The teft side artery of the neck was cut snd there was ble.edino from thot DSace. Cause of dea-l'h was excessive 'eedinci, as a "esult of cu+tina or ai-tery of'neck. Iniurv was ante ,(,!;«?lua%i> '/'^^. ..-•;?(^ y & / s "•^•f:<y ^ i;»... "'v- .^y' 'a«ii.'.>i..i mortem in pa-hjre cnd death was hoffsicida! i" natur'e. In view of abovs oculdr &, rriedicc! ev'dence. it is estdblished thct ths death of'Ayutu was nomiciaal m naTure. \, 9) As far as complicity of the accussd/appeliant in the crime in question is concerned, PW-1 Korsa Kate, wife of ths deceased, has categorically stated that on the fcteful day, she aiong with her husband (since deceased) & accused went to weekly market, when they were returning, they stayed.near the saifi tree, which was s+anding near their ''f. house ond the accused atl-diked her husbond with a knife on his neck. \. Thei's wos no Drevious enmi-i^' or cim auo""e! between them. As a "esuit of iniurv her husband tell down and biood star'ted oozing out o- -he :n iurv. When she raised cries. the accused flee away from the piace of occurrence towards forest. On the next day pc>nchaya+ was convened, the accused did not turn up in the Panchayot, as he discppeared. Thsreafter the matter was reDorted in the Police Station. In cross- exQmiriation of this witness, the defence has not been ob!e to eiicit any c'rcumstance which discrsdits the evidence of this witness. Nothina has been brouqht on reco"d in cr'oss-exarr'ination, which shows that this witness has implicated the accused in n fatse case on account of any Qnimosit)' or anything eise. Therefore, there is nothing before the COUP+ belc.w to disbelieve the evidsnce of this witness and has "ightiy pfaced "etiance on .the evidence of this witness. Shs is a natural witness. Therefore. contBJicit'/ of the accused in the crri'r'.e in auestion is' established on ths evidence of this wstness. AAoreover, the weaDon ot offence was seized at the instance of the accused, therefore, we cre of ths ooif'ion that es far as comolicity of the accused in the crime in question is'concerned, we do not find any illegality of infirmity in the iudQment of the trial Court. 10) Learned counsel for the accused/appeliant argued that the accused only once attacked the deceased, therefore, it cannot be said that the accused had attacked the deceased with an intention to cause s. '®1 %.r:£xl 1 JJ .^y ^i'fS^" '-s:i;:i;.;S;J^" .'- ^:^^ ^-^s^f '^; si!^i>fea«<<. his death. He submitteQ that ths offence laaoirst the occussd does not travel beyond Section 304 Par't-II of ths Irdici'" Per'o! Codz. 111 On '¥'h^ oth^i" hof;d [sc{.!vyss.'o coun^^I tor "hg S'tat^ suDDor'r€;d th^ of the triai C6urt. 12) Learned counsel for the accused/appellant placsd reliance upon the decision of Punjab <S. Haryanc High Court rendered in the matter of Dhoramvir and others vs. 13) As far as the iudament of Harycna High Court rendered in tha matter of Dhara'ntfJr (siipra) is concerned, the Court held that In a sudden and unor^meditated fight!.'on a triflinq matte" there beina no pi-evious enmity and there w.'as a singie blow, the occused was cuiity of culDQble homicide not amountina to murder. 14) Fscts of the sbove case are distinguishable froni the oresent case. In the or'esent casa, as oer ths evidence ot PW-1 Korsa K.ate (wits ot the deceQsed), accussd, deceased & she went to the weekiy market, when they returned, they stayed near the salfi tree, which was standing near the house of the deceased, the accused all of a sudden started saying that they a,"e co'r'mitting theft of juice of salfi t"ee and attacked the deceased with a kn'fe on his neck, as o result of which left side artery of neck was cut &. there was profused bleeding, Ayutu succumbed to the injuries instantaneously. Fro'm the evidance of Korsa Kate (PW-1), it is estabtished that the accused cttacked the deceased without any rhyme or rso.son and in this caae there was no sudden quarre!, thersfore, there •A-QS no reason for the accused to attack the deceased. On the contrary, the accused c'ttacked the deceased with a knife, which he was carryinq, after savina thot the decessed WQS committina thsft of the iuice of salfi tres of the accused. I" the aiven situation, intention of the accused is to be ascertQined by the naturs of weapon used, the force with wmch ths attack WQS made an.d place of the body where the accused Qttacked i.e. the vitcl part of b'ody (neck), that too with knife, which was meant fo". '3C{ '^^--.^S^'S^^S^'^ cutting of salfi tree, cs o resuit of which ar+sr-y was cut and thers wa; profused bieedina and deceased died. 15) From the Qbove facts, it is estabiished that the intention of thi accused to commit the murder of Ayutu wcss writ ^args, as such, we do no' find cny illegality or int-irniity In the judgment of trial Court. 16) In the result, Vne appea! beii dlsmissed and it is herebv dismissed. Sd/- • • , 1 L.C. Bhadoo Judge devoid of merit is tiabls to b® Sd/- T.P. Sharma bowri 9"