HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR -^ CORAM : Hon'ble Shri RaieevLGru^ta,C.J. & Hon^ble^hri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. ^•iiwri'i (.:" Criminal Appeal No. 420 pf 2002 Lalit Ganda Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Judenient For consideration Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge HQN»BLESHRIJUSTICE RAJEEV GUPTA _9 ^L^y^^-^ Sd/- Chief Justice Post for Judgment: _3 /09/2009 Sd/- SunilKumarSinha Judge HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM : Hpn'ble Shri Ra.ieev Gupta, C.J. & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. Criminal Appeal No. 420 of 2002 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Lalit Ganda son of Lakhmu Ganda, aged about 35 years, resident of village Chhote Donger at present Batumpara, Orchha, P.S. Orchha, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Orchha, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) (Appeal under Section 374 (2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure) Appearance: Mr. V.P. Gupta, Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate General, for the State. JUDGMENT (3 .09.2009) Following judgment of the Court was delivered by Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. (1) Appellant Lalit Ganda stands convicted u/s 302 (double murder) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.200/- with default sentence of 6 months (in 2 counts) with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently for commission of murder of Kosaram and Foolobai, by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 514/2001 on 5th ofMarch, 2002. ^N^ Criminal Appeal No. 420 of2002 (2) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:- Deceased Kosaram (65 years) and Foolobai (60 years) were husband and wife. They were residing together. Appellant Lalit Ganda was also residing with them since last 6 months. On 8.8.2001 at about 6.00 p.m., deceased Kosaram said him to make his own arrangement. The allegations are that on this, the appellant assaulted Kosaram with a knife. When wife of Kosaram, deceased Foolobai, tried to intervene, she was also assaulted by the appellant by knife. Kosaram died on the spot on 8.8.2001. Aayturam (PW-1), by chance, visited the house of Kosaram on 9.8.2001 and found him dead. Foolobai was alive. He asked Foolobai about all this, on which, she stated that the appellant has committed murder of her husband by giving him knife blows and he has also assaulted her by the same knife. Aayturam (PW-1) immediately rushed to Lakhmuram (village Patel-PW- 2) and narrated the incident. Lakhmuram (PW-2), Gundru, Budhram (PW-4) and Beema etc. came to the house of Kosaram. Foolobai was alive by that time. Patel Lakhmuram (PW-2) asked Foolobm about the incident, who narrated that the appellant committed murder of her husband by a knife and he has also assaulted her. They saw the dead body of deceased Kosaram lying in pool of blood. The matter was reported to police station Orchha by Lakhmuram (PW~2) at about 10.00 a.m. on 9.8.2001, on which, a First Information Report (Ex.-P/3) was registered against the appellant u/ss 302 & 307 IPC. S.H.O. reached to the scene of occurrence, gave notice (Ex.-P/lO) to the Panchas and prepared inquest (Ex.-P/S) on the body of deceased Kosaram. Plain soil, blood stained soil and a T-shirt were seized from the place of occurrence under Ex.-P/l. Plain soil, blood stained soil and a piece of saree were seized under Ex.-P/2 from the place where Foolobai was lying in injured condition. Site plan was prepared under Criminal Appeal No. 420 of2002 Ex.-P/ll. Foolobai was sent for her medical examination to Primary Health Centre, Orchha, where she was examined by Dr. Brijnandan Banpuriya (PW-5), who prepared his report Ex.-P/6. According to the MLC report, Foolobai had received one cut injury on right side of her neck admeasuring 1 x V2 x % inches. She has also received one stab wound on right epi-chordum region. It was of the size ofl x Vsx 1 inches. Doctor opined that the injuries were caused by sharp cutting object and they were grievous in nature. Foolobai was referred to Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur for further treatment, where she died at about 20.45 hours on the same day. Inquest on the body of deceased Foolobai was prepared under Ex.-P/4. The dead bodies were sent for their post-mortem examinations which were conducted by Dr. Brijnandan Banpuriya (PW-5) who prepared his reports Ex.-P/13 & P/26. The Autopsy Surgeon noticed many injuries on the bodies of the deceased persons and opined that the causes of death were internal and visceral haemorrhages on account of injuries and the deaths were homicidal in nature. In further investigation, after taking the accused/appellant into custody his memorandum statement (Ex.-P/14) u/s 27 of the Evidence Act was recorded and a knife was seized at the instance of the appellant under Ex.- P/15. The seized articles were sent for their chemical exainination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur under Ex.-P/24 but the F.S.L. reportcould not be produced. After completion of usual investigation, the charge- sheet was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narayanpur, who in turn committed the matter to the Session Court, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, from where, it was received on transfer by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur, who conducted the trial and convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as aforementioned. /' Criminal Appeal No. 420 of2002 (3) The conviction of the appellant is based on the oral dying declarations made by deceased Foolobai, one before Aayturam (PW-1) and the other before Aayturam (PW-1), Lakhmuram (PW-2) and Budhram (PW-4). (4) Mr. V.P. Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has not disputed the homicidal death of the deceased persons. Moreover, it comes in the evidence of Aayturam (PW-1), Lakhmuram (PW-2) and Budhram (PW-4) that deceased Foolobai made dying declarations before them stating that the appellant assaulted her husband leading to his death and he also assaulted her, due to which, she sustained above injuries. The Autopsy Surgeon also noticed fatal injuries on the bodies of the deceased persons and opined that the causes of death were internal and visceral haemorrhages on account of injuries sustained by them and ,the deaths were homicidal in nature. Therefore, it was established that the deaths of the deceased persons were homicidal in nature. (5) Mr. V.P. Gupta then argued that the evidence of Aayturam (PW-1), Lakhmuram (PW-2) and Budhram (PW-4) are not reliable. Therefore, the conviction cannot be sustained. (6) On the other hand, Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State, opposed these arguments and supported the judgment and order passed by the Sessions Court. J / Criminal Appeal No. 420 of2002 (7) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records of the sessions case. (8) Aayturam (PW-1) deposed that "On Thursday at about 8.00 a.m., he reached to the house of deceased persons and saw that the dead body of Kosaram was lying in the courtyard of the house. Foolobai was weeping. He asked Foolobai, on which, she stated that her husband was assaulted by the appellant by a knife, due to which, he died. She also stated that when she tried to intervene, she was also assaulted by the appellant. Foolobai has also sustained injuries. On this, he immediately rushed to village Patel Lakhmuram (PW-2), who was in his field, and narrated the story to him. After this, Lakhmuram (PW-2), Gundru, Budhram (PW-4) and Beema came to the house of the deceased and asked Foolobai about the incident, on which, she narrated before all of them that her husband was assaulted by the appellant by a knife, due to which, he died and she was also assaulted by him". (9) Lakhmuram (PW-2) also narrated the same story and deposed that on the information given by Aayturam (PW-1), he reached to the house of the deceased along with the above persons and saw the dead body of Kosaram. When he asked Foolobai, she narrated the same story to them. The above evidence of Aayturam (PW-1) and Lakhmuram (PW-2) is further supported the evidence ofBudhram (PW-4). (10) Though these witnesses were cross examined by the defence but the defence has not been able to elicit any such circumstance K. '^ ^> Criminal Aroeal No. 420 of 2002 on which either their evidence may be discarded or it may be said that they are trying to falsely implicate the appellant in crime in question. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the evidence of these witnesses. The evidence of these witnesses clearly suggest that deceased Foolobai made oral dying declarations before them on two occasions. Firstly, when Aayturam (PW-1) met her in the morning and thereafter when the village Patel Lakhmuram (PW-2) visited her house along with the other villagers. Admittedly, she was an inmate of the house and her presence in her own house cannot be doubtful. Her oral dying declarations are also corroborated by the contents of the F.I.R. (Ex.-P/3) lodged by Lakhmuram (PW-2). (11) On due appreciation of entire evidence on record, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the judgment and finding recorded by the Sessions Court that the appellant committed murder of the deceased persons and he was liable for punishment u/s 302 IPC in 2 counts. (12) The appeal has no merits, the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- SunilKumarSinha Judge vatti