, KJI-189/(Jail) |,C. J.I'.R. y/94/2,000 GL:A.a^H3/59 APPEAL. OF PRtSON E R i;No.................&'S^.,................Nanie. l' Fafher'sname ,...,..—fi.....;........Ct, iyision Bench ^riniina!^ (i^Residenee ......^^..^^^.^ge.:..^^^. ^.._;-.... / ....._._ ^"¥WW,'<IT^("^'^l^-q*l 4,% Seutencedto ../-?., ..........On.....,3.f-^^.97- '~}-qy^^W~ ,~\ .' h,/^ : '.r^ :""^"S:"•I "ry^'^<si^'W^"' u'"wra'i^W^"^ ^...i.ii^a. ''-'.{ [£s A ,A^ %T'iWe-'38-if/a the It is explained to the prisoner that ifhe statis or wishes'tp be represented by legal P'actitioner the Appellate Court will not pi-oceed with the./base for seven days unless legal practitioner appears. If the legal-pfactifioner does not appear withia seven days he may not heard at all . Iftbe prisoner states that he does not wish to be fepre- sented by legal practitioner" thecouTt maypruceed at once with tfae case and wjll.net be obligedto give a heariiig to any legal .pr.actitioner who sIioul4fi^'^ta£»i3i?»y_'SIF_^t£t*, 1 Date ofApplication for copy of Judgement 2 Date onwhich copy received 3 Date on which Appeal seat 4 Whether fhe prisODerwSshes to be i-epresented or DOt-'Yes^]'& No.:.. .............. ......Sa.S.S-H............. Name Confined in ..................7.;- ?f '•^^w-^-^^ Jail .-...., No..S0.3L.(CT^/SX. ........-Dated.. f Porwarded to the GIlIEr iUDICIAL-MAOASTRATE W< ,.ifti^<^W ?3S?T c-'w^T^PT yy' ^ t^spTr i ] togatherwhich a eopyofjudgementor'brderpassed i'n the case foi- favour oftrans^''' /. t/. . : ' . ' ^. _ .' i^ission to the pi-oper Appellate Court. p^vrar:- s^ N.p^g ^S^rasteadaSSt "e"tca^;'i.RaJDur.ffiT,P.^ ,Jail.. ........ ^^AIA- tj; ^^.r^fftc0't ) ; - !• IDafe ofreceipt ih... ........ /.................,. oFfice ./ . • .,_..• . ' |Date of-receipt record'-ti/acc&mpaaythe .......... ,*.s»a JMemp ofAppeat to ifae Appellate co'drf ........ ......................,^.(,v(..^..»^..^. No~ ;orwarded to 'fhe Dated ;................... 199 QfTeceiptin'A'ppetiateeourt .;.... ...^.;;4 :1. ...;;.,.. ,.<.;>.^..........;-'..'...<»..^'^ (-P,.m'Q&) »:£-«-'€S '•• ' ^<Trt^; • ^^^l; S'^,:.^^, sSeT-sSiS^':-'.''^'yS, ^^^^^^^•ir;^^^^,^.^.^ "26. XI-HC-78 3IlSRT%TR-< (raTsn^rstiil* d-"i •<<I<IK'I<I, «Ti)«'l6,Rtdiyy -•_ r^y ^. ^.o <^ 9/V ^- iTTOTn'^n^'^"""''*'"'""'"^''^ 20fr 3Ti^?rira^ ((pfg^^r) WBIWHfN'sn^T niifl' Bhi Present earted Wr. M.P.S. Bhati'a, Mr.U.K.S. Chandei, ted r^ This appeai is directed| order of sentence dated 31 Ambikapur, In S.T. No. 384/91 after hoiding accussd Bhadvl under Sections 302, 201 of| i.Tiprisonment for life and ril / .. / . qil<lfl'<<)1-< ^l1clT¥te^l'<Rl+<K ^s^iTsn^r TT! No. 2049 of 1997 counsel forthe appsiiant. rned P.L. forthe SSate/respondenS. against the judgment of conviction ana' .5.1997 passed by'Sessions Judge, 5 whereby the learned Sessions Judge a guiity for commission of {he offence She I.P.C',, sentenced him to undsrgo jorous imprisonment for seven years P.T.O. c^ XI-HC-78 an^TqiTRTR? (TSIT3T]^rst)li°t) -1. •i3^.^;^.> l»'iWl, +1MMI Sh*l|cft J5? •<11<IIM^, »^(1<H'16, lcjdiyy *»*•'*»•*•*• ••*<*/** 2®e- 3<i^i ><acn (l^rfg^ST) ?:RtTWH^(T31I^T 2 respectively. Both the sente| Hovi/ever, co-accused Sudh^ Ssctions 302/34 and 201 oftil 2. Case of the prosecut| iodged the FirsS information Bairampur on 3 July'1995 | paddy in his fieid at about 1C] came io his field and inforni missing for the iast 15 days. body after tying the same v'Ath\ been throw.n into the water tail those persons wsnt to the t^ dead body tied with wooden jj on the water. It seemed as if thrown the dead body into th P.S. Bairampur teft for the the dead body was floating or to the Panchas. inauest reoort •. / *wf<-f41-< wtRisrtfteI^<Ri<^i< ^srf^iTgn^r |ices were dlrected to run concurrentiy. |n was acquitted of ths eharge under iP.C. |on, in brief, is that PW-1 Hariprasad Reoort (Ex.P/1) in the Polics SSation - |o the effect that when he was sowini .00 a.m. Libna Uraon and Beeru Uraon ted that his caughter Guiiya Uraon is FThey have come to knowthat one dead |waoden plankvi/ith the help ofrope, has ik of Gosain Uraon.. Then he along wth ink of Gosain Uraon and sav/ that the !ank Vi'ith the heip of rope, v/as floatin< Isomebodv afier committing murder, has |e water. Receiving this report S.H.O., sdene of occurrence where he found that the v/ater. After giving noti.ee (Ex.P/3) (Ex.P/4) ofthe dead bodv of Guliya Bai P.T.O. W} XI-HC-78 ^?&t: 3n^?r^>rR^i+ HW3[I^Tsb1 3^-:qPn?PT, 8iT(1+l'IS, Rlclltfy ITTORT {hW<h •c<y-<Q-'• •2''?-?'-<?/-^' ^W 3ii^i ><aq> (ytg°«^<r) gwTWHfscrsn^T - 3- was prepared. While in memorandum (Ex.P/5) regar<p lai aiong wth her clothes v/4 dead body from that place, j|: the pieces of her cioihes wer^; ihat, ^veapon ofoffence i.e. i^. into possession under Ex.Pij' bamboo stick, one nyion roi|)e, wooden plank; mat were taken into possession underEx.P/8. Pi|i of occurrence was taken int'l the deceased found on hsr Ex.P/12. Dead body of examinati'on to Primary He^ Vaishya (PVV-6) conducted p^ report (Ex.P/13). He opined a resuit of biovi/ bv hard and skull. Adipocere Vi/as prese; Clothes Vi/hich were exhumec as the ciothes vu'iich vs/ere foi /• . / . +l'!<Ic1''fl-f t<|t|flT^'teI^t'<Rl+AK ^Sff^TW^T )oiice custody accused Bh ing the place \ivhere dead •re earlier buried and after was throvsiD in the water tai dva gave ofGuiiya umina the v/hereas buried in the saire pit. !n pursuance of >n pickaxe stained with biood v/as taken 3. On his memorandum (Ex.P/7) one ain and bloodstajned soi! from the place )-possession undsr Ex.P/10. Ciothes of aody '.wre taken into possession under 3uiiya Bai was sent for postmortem ith Centre, Bairampur wi-iere Dr. 5.P. istmortem and p'epared the postmortem :hat cause of death v/as due to coma as blunt objeci on the Semporal region of nt and death 'AQS homicida! in nature. i at the Instance of the accused as well |nd on the dead body of deceased were P.T.O. Z. l-l' XI-HC-78 3TI^T^>TR-fi+ BaiT3n^Ts»]iii«ti z3';' NI+4CTI ShHlcft Tn^anqRTO-, (STnu'is, piirtiyy ^, ^y^'^.o^<'•'l- WT 2W- 3ll^!?l <iat»('i^t^ai^eT) WtiTSiiTgf^rsn^r 4— sent to Forensic Science Labc|ratory in orderto ascertain vAether both the clothes are the pieces o from Vi/liere report Ex.P/22 jnyestigation charge sheet \A@; s'fff^- Sessions Judge, Ambikapur ' the charge against the accus Statements of the accused v^s recorded under Sections 313 of the Cr.P.G. in vsfhich they denied the prosecution 'evidence andi been falsely impiicated in the ^ 3. L'earned Sessions ^Ji.1 respectivs parties convicte| aTorementioned. 4. We have heard Mr. M. on behalf of the accused'appl P.L. for the State/respondent. >. \/ !'^. *i<<F<-i41-f Ki^(-i1'ifteiA<Rit<i<. ^i STf^IT 3ITCRT c the same Sari, Pstticoat and Biouse, vras recei'/ed. After completion of 3 filed in the Court of Judiciai Magistrate io in turn committed the case to the htiere prosecutlon in order to establish |ed persons examined nine Vtfltnesses. the materiai appearing against them in stated that they are innocent and have 'ime. dge after hearina counsel for the j and sentenced the accused as P.S. Bhatia, iearned counsel appearin; silant and Mr. U.K.S. Chandei, !earne< P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3TI^T?iTf^(R; ofW3n^Tsb1 *II*1WI ShHICtl 3^'sipTRTO-, »'rfltt'is,Rldiyy .q^..c<7:.-.^.'..2d.?.7/7.'^.q. ^g_ 3ll^l 4atti (lc<t^qi«isT) ??(ITWflfef3IT^T - S'- 5. Mr. Bhatia has not dist>uted the homicidal death of Guljya Bai. Apart from that, PW-6 Dr. S| on the body ofGuliya Bai has| thlgh, chest and mandible.bil fraetured, there was a depre^ death wa.s com a, jnjuries wej death was homicidal in natulre vAness has not been cross-< His injury report is Ex.P/13. This ^xamined bv the defence, therefore. from the above medical evidence Vias homicidal in nature. 6. As far as involvemeri question 'is concerned, there| the accused in this case. Tfl evidence i.e. the pieces of recovered at the instance of| 7. As per settled law in cireumstantla! evidence, as .p •. / 'biold'in-f t<i*<tiTffte^t'<Ri«i< ^.afff^iran^T P. Vaishya who conducted postmortem stated that there were contusions on the >ne Vi/as fractured, zygornetic bone Vs'a.s ;sed fracture on the skul! bone, cause of \e caused by hard and blunt object and t is esiabiished that death of Guiiya Bai of the accused Bhadva in crime in is no ocular or direct evidence against e conviciion is based on circumstantial clothes of deceased Guliya Bai Vi/ere accused Bhadva from the piace wtiere firstlythe dead body\ft@s burii|d after commission ofmurder. order to rest conviction based on the ^r the decislon of She Apex Court in the P.T.O. XI-HC-78 Sl^T^TR.ijch cTSTT3n^?TshHlcfi WH?TT ^*1T9i s^'^iraRTO, ssTfltf'is, Riwiuy -.. .<^..ft. .'.2^.'iu'& 4ft0- 3n^T(ra?R (ipfgg^r) S^tTWHfeTStI^T .- £- matter of Dhananiov ChafSerfee Vs. State of W.B. reDorted in (1994] 2 SCC 220. the cjrcumstan'] d. •. / the circumstanij sought to be established; those circumsta unerringly pointj the circumstanc chain so comp| conciusion that •ASS committed b the Circumstantil must be compl^ oth er hv'PQthesi; sucn eviaence iuilt of the acci innocence. «bi'i)f<'i41-ft<i*<dT^'teIA<Ri*<i< ^sri^iT^n^r ial evidence must satisfy the folioviflni es from which an inference of guiit is dravim, must be cogentiy and firmiy nces should be of a definiie tendsncy ig towards guilt ofthe accused; ;es, taken cumuiat'ively should form a ete that Shere-is no escape from the within ai! human probability the crime iythe accused and none else; and il evidence in orderto systain conviction 'te and incapable of explanation of any than that ofthe guilt ofthe accused and should not oniy be consistent vAh the Ised but shouid be inconsistent w/ith his P.T.O. -s^ XI-HC-78 sntw?irR-<i* cIW 3TR?T gWRi K : . ?s?"iiww, ®Tflu'is,R)ciit<y . G^ -^~- .2.^ticl [1^_ NtHWI »>W«h"•-••••<••••••••••••'•^ 2®0— sn^wraw ('i^gs^r) BCTRIT flfer a'n^T 9.- 8. Mr. Bhatia subtfiitted tii contour of the clothes which accused and the ciothes deceased, did not match as argued that recovery at the in) evidence, therefore, merely be connected with the crime fhe prosecution has not bee|i motive on the part of accusecj Bai. 9. As far as motive to concerned, when the case motive is estabiished, it play^ v/ith the crime in question. very difficult to ascertain as \ prevailing in his mind at the ti| known to the accused and )at as per the F.S.L. report (Ex.P/22) the were exhumed at the instance of She \i|/hich were seized from the body of |the contour was damaged. He further ^tance of accused is a very weak type of oh this cireumstance the accused cannot ndt •!bi''<fd''<1-f *fitftiTtftecfl'<Ri'wi< ^.srf^ran^T in question. He further contended that able to establish that there was any Bhadva to commit the murder of Guiiya commit the murder of Guliya Bai is |s based on circumstantiai evidence if ^ a vital rile in connecting the accused ^ut at the same time, if it is missing it is to what was the motive of the accused fne of commission of the crime. it is only the third person. Therefore, the Court is required to scrutinize th4 'cjrcumstantial evidence in a carefui . / P.T.O. 's*^ XI-HC-78 3D^TqiTfi?TN; BW ST^V sbliti *TTHcTT ^t)T9i 3^'^TPI1?PT, S9Tfl«'IS,PlMI'My —0-Y:A...2-<:?. #'# * <^»^»••*»»••<•/* *J;t ^* ^ 200 Sn^TTV^R (yit^si^iT) ?^nw;Hf?cT3;n^T -& =t)i<ifii<(1-< fi*<CTTfftecA<Ri«i< ^wl^r-CT^r •te. ^ manner before arriving at t(ie conclusion that prosecution has been abte to estabiish the involv^ment of the accused in crime in question |ies laid down by the Apex Court. on the basis ofabove princi] ;er PW-8 Anandram has stated that on 10. The investigating oiTji 3.7.1995 in the presence o|f witnesses during in'/estigation accused iie in polic'e cust|3dy made a dis&losure that dead body of ie fieid near his house and thereafter he jn after exhuming the dead body, wrapped plank and threw the same into the Vi/aier Guliya Bai was buried in th alona with his brother Sudh^ it vAh mat, tied v/ith vu'ooder) tank of Maiai Uraon. The d iouse and Sari of Guliya B| vrfiere th'e dead bodv Vi/as which bears his signature fj that the accused took them and Sari wsre taken out M 'Atiich were seized under E^ the above evidence and h^ memorandum Ex.P/5 v/t-iich \ / . / |ccused also disclosed that the pieces of |ai were again buried in the same pit from 4xhumed and his memorandum is Ex.P/5 1-om 'B' to 'B' portjon. He further stated |near t'he pit from vitiere pieces of Biouse l' the accused and handed over to them j.P/9. PW-1 Hariprasad has eorroborated js stated that the acc'used Bhadva gave [bears his signature and accused handed P.T.O. -, c' ^ XI-HC-78 3f^TqiTR.fi<t) gaiTsn^rgnR) *T1*1rtl S»itTT<ti S^^iraRPT, aiTn*i'i6,Isitiwy **•'»**'*+/*+*+****+•+/*+* 20fr 3ll^l Maqi (lc<t3a«t,eT) STtTRR: flfgtT SII^T over the pieces of clothes to •» the pit, which were taken into| has not been abie to elicit an^ of these witnesses to show the estAb given by the accused and in effected. Therefore, it is given by the accused, in purs were recovered. admissible under Section 291 as 'H-1' and piece of Sari 'l-^ t>i<<Fci<fl-f iiHflTfftecA<Ri«i< ^i sri^ir 3ii^r police after taking out the same from possession under Ex.P/9. The defence circymstance in the cross-examination that the above memorandum was not sursuance of that the recovery was not ished that memorandum Ex.P/5 was Itance of which clothes of the deceased PW-8 Anandram has ^gain steted that the recovered pieces were sent to F.S.L., Sagar fcjr examination. The report of F.S.L. is 3 of the Cr.P.C. Perusal of the report (Ex.P/22)'reveals that the piec|e of Sari recovered from the pit marked ' recovered at the instance of accused tallied with each other in desigjn, in warp and woof and on microscopic examination both the pieces 411ied with each other. Even on burning of both the pieces, it turned ihto grey colored ash.'H-3' and '1-1' i.e. pieces of Biouse of the decea|sed, which was taken from the body of deceased and the piece of c|othe recovered at the instance of the accused fiom the pit, also ta! ». / ed with each other on the above tests. P.T.O. •sr: XI-HC-78 *TI^(^TT ^HIcK 3:5ET '<||<||ciq, ©Tflfl'IS,Rtdltfy ..C^.^....?OH^.J.^,^ 200- W^\ W<h (lctt^q^iT) 3I1^rqiT^i=b craT3TT^?Tsh^|ef) ?wraT;Hl?a'3;n»S^T /o -j *i'I<Fd<fl-f *jitiTi1'fftec3'<(«i'Ki< ^ia'll^rsn^T ?^. The laboratory could not concj the contour was damaged. coloured pieces of clothes of pieces of Sari of Ex. H-1 and;t^ the piece of Blouse of Ex.H-3. to establish the fact based recovered at the instance of ai the pieces of Sari and Blouse ^ an admitted fact that the place were taken into possession, w| established that the accusedl where the.dead body of Guliy other things were conceaied. pointing towards the guiit of record to show that the accu: faise crime. 11. On the basis of aforess opinion that finding of the tria! d / ~) . / . uct test in respect of contour because Final opinion was given that yellow Ex. j-2 tallied with the yellow coloured le pieces of clothes of Ex. 1-1 tallied with Therefore, prosecution has been able on this report that Sari and Blouse xused Bhadva from the pit tallied with .eized from the body of deceased. It is from where the clothes of the deceased as shown by the accused, as such it is had the knowledge about the place a Bai was buried and the clothes and 'his is a strong cireumstance unerringly the accused and there is nothing on >ed Bhadva has been impltcated in a id discussion, we're of the considered Court convicting the accused Bhadva ^. P.T.O. M uA; XI-HC-78 sn^r ^r R-fi* W 3TT^5T Sbliti ^ .0 '^^ /- ly v !>\' ^"•'T'C '• ^) ^_y S^airaRTO, aiflwKp, Rfiwy ^^^^..^.^,..^7/-^^ 3<1^1 44* (T1^3g^F) gTaRRflfer'w^r ~i'r- under Sections 302 and 3 circumstantial evidence andl iiiegalily or infirmity. 12. In the result, the appejat be dismissed and is hereby djsmissed -SdA- L.C. Bhadoo Judge wrig^ WRTt ifte^t <^WCT( ^w^iran^r 01 of the IPC, is based on strong the same does not suffer from anv )at being devoid of substance is iiabis to Sd/- DHIRENDRA MISHRA Judge •• / P.T.O.