XlvHC-78 Saw; m,%mg{ 4Lk . <r-..V>.~...1.°1.11.:o.‘... mm In 200 / 9é WmaHW) mam WWW WWEfg‘z‘im mawem’w $mm Division Bench: - Hon’bQe Mgr. LC. Bhadoo and on’bie Mr. §1€ii§y‘.i5htii¥ai£%ava JJ. 14.9.2996 H Mr. K.K. Singh, Adv cwe far “the appeiiant Mr. U.N.5. Deo, A PL. for The Sfd'e/respond n1: Om! Judgmem die? ed on Dais'. Par L C7 Bhndan .T: - This appeal is direc ed agains? fhe judgmem‘ of convicfion & order of senfence da?ed 19” Janu Hiomi Public ?rosecu?or wifh Mr. Akhi§ Mishm, , 2001 passed by iearned Sessians Judge, Raipun in ST. No‘130/98, wher by learned Sessions Judge affer- holding ihe accused/appellan‘r guilty f r commission 9f affence under Seci'ion 302 of ihe I.P.C. for commi‘riing r urder of his wife nameiy Ramkaii, senfenced him ‘io suffer imprisonmen‘i f0 life. Tha prosecu‘rion vc e, in brief, is i'hs? an 24.10.1997 a? abeui EQG pm. when i'ne accused/o lcm‘i, his wife Ramkaii and Thrae daugh‘izr's were in fine mom, some qiierca ion Took glace be‘iween accused & deceased and cceused/appellani' iiirew a burning kemsene lamp on Ramkali, as a resuli of which Sari of Ramkali ha eaughf fire and she sfar‘i'ed burning. Ramkali siarfed raising screams, which her daugh‘iers came aui‘ of i-he rcom and si-ar‘i'ed shaming Lsave-sa . Hearing fine cries, ‘ihe iandlord Awadhmm (PW- 3) came on The scene and sew :ihgi' Ramkali was burning in i'he roam end accused was si‘h‘ing on iiie of in Thai room. On’enquiry made by Awadhram from ii'ie accused/appelia i firm? as i'o how Rcmkoli has been burnt he P.T.O. d a p l o v XLHC—78 mw,m,m WW v...... .............. Fri 200 Wm (W) m$riéw asnmm WW§W®W mmmm‘ %a€f§mm replied fha‘l' 1e? her die. Therm-Fran Ramkaii was ‘J‘aken #0 The I’Aedicai Co§3ege Hos§i*ul, Raipur a she was admi‘rfed in fhe casuaHy ward. On examinafian if was feund ha? shz had receivad burn irduries up“; 75%. Deha?i nalishi (Ex3—9) was . iven by Babii, daugm'er of accused 8: deceased, in tha Poiéce Station Uria, b sad on whig‘h FER. (EXP—19) was regisfered for commission of offence unde Secfion 307' of The IPC. Qamkaii was examined by Dr. GP. Dewangan (PW-1 ) and he nofed fhaf There were superficial burn a? chest abdcmen (whole), bofh fhighs up‘ra knee (whole), bath arms {who¥e) back (whoie) and parcenfage of burn was 75%. He prepared The repor‘r Ex?— 18. Babii, daughfer of deceased & accused, was dso examined by ffhe eame doctor and he prepared The injury repor? EXP-19, in which he noficed Tha’r ?he Ief‘i- elbow was burnt. We Execm-ive Magisfr'afe Shri Ashok Tiwari {PW’ 7) was requesfed by ‘rhe police fa record fhe dymg declara‘h‘on of RamkaEi and on fheir request he recorded the dying deciara‘i‘ion (EXP-8) of Ramkaii. However, during freafmem she succembed fa i’he burn injuries in the hospi‘iai on 27.i0.19$7, ‘i'here‘fore, a merg iniima‘iion (EXP-16) was given by I Ward-boy Su‘resh Baghei, bcsed on fhaf A.S.I. S'nri Guiab Das also sen? 'ihe merg infima‘iian (ExP-l?) and ihe affence was converied ima Sewicn 3-32 of E?C. The Invesiiga?in9 Ofi'icer affer giving no‘rice (ExP—l) ‘ro fhe Panchas prepared ’rhe Panehnama (ExWP-2) of The dead body 0f Ramkaii. He fook im‘o possession one haif burn? scri, biouse, pe‘ificoaf, kerosene iamp, which was ihrown on Ramkaii by ‘ihe aceused cap & wick of lamp and one yeiiaw colour bed sheef were Taken info possession under EXP-5 from fhe piace of occurrence. Posfmor‘rem of 'i‘he body of deceased Ramkaii was eondycfed by i i if XI—HC-78 mW,mn—qr,%mmgt mmo"oo0ot ..... v .....oo Irv: 200 Wm (W) WWW\ mmm mwifwm maxmm %?3TF%H3?I%¥T Dr. 5.K. Dadu (PW-15), who prepared f'ne pos’rmorfem reporf EXP-20. Recovered arm’icies were sen? for examinafion +0 Forensic Science Labora‘rory, $agar, from where repor? EXP—24 was raceived. Affer- compiefion of usual invesiigafion, charge shee? was fiied agains? fhe accused/appeihrr in The Cour? of learned Judicial Magisfmfe Firs? Cinss, Raipur, who in turn commi‘Hed 1"ne case 10 harmed Sessions Judqe, Raipur for +r-iai. The prosecu?ion in order ‘fc asmbiish fhe charge againsi' the accusw/appelbm examined 21 wifnesses. On the o‘rher hand, s‘m‘remem of eecesediceppe!!ant was recat'ded under Section 313 of CraP.C. in whisk he pieaded innocence abouf ‘rh maiden? and submiffed fhm‘ m The f§me of inciden'? he was no? at fhe r sidence. He aiso Sim-ed ‘kha'r he does no? knew why the wH'nesses have dep ed againsf him. Learned Sessians J dge, after hearing The argumen‘fs of iearned’ Addifionod PgbHc Prosecu‘ro dz learned counse! for the amused, cenvéefed and sen‘mnced The accused, s memioned in paral of 'ihis judgment We have heard Mr. .K. Singh, Adv. for iioe appeilan‘i and Mr. Deo, Addi. Public ?rosecufor wii'h Mr. Akl’u’l Mishra, PL. for fhe Sfa‘re. Homicidal deai'h of § mkali has no? been éispui‘ed by iear-ned coLmsel for The accused/appelianf. Apart from fhaf, from fhe dying declarafion {EXP-8) of Romkali recon ed by PW-7 S‘nri Ashok Tiwari, Execui‘ive Magisir'aie in which she has sfa‘ied ‘ihai‘ she received ilne bum injuries on accoum of ihrowing of bumi g kerosene lamp on her, as also fine evidence of Dr'. 5.l<. Dodu (PW—15), wh has si'al'ed Tho-i Ramkali died on accouni‘ of complica‘iion resul‘ied on occoun‘l‘ of stoppage of func‘rioning pi@or1’ and l i 1 ::3 A :J.o -lc XI-HC—78 . a1 200 ww,m,m mm (W) mamw WWW mwffwm %3TF%H3TI%2I matmm respira'ror'y sysfem, i? is es rabiished Thar} "rhe deaf‘n a‘f Ramkali was homicide! m na’mre. As far as invalvememf of accused/appellanf in commission of crime in auesiionis concerned, wi‘rnéfsses nameiy Fagni Bai (PW-4) & Mohaniai (WV-5) have fumed hostiia. Evan firs? indapendani wi‘ingss nameiy Awadhram (PW- 3), landlord of fhe eccu‘sed/appeliani, who reached on iha scene of occurrenca immediaieiy, s aiso been deciared hos‘i‘iie, as 'ne has noi supporied i'ne prosecuiion casz in io‘rc. Bm‘ fhe fad remains ’rha‘r he has \ si'a‘i'ed fhai' accused aiong ‘rh his wife Ramkaii 8i ‘i'hr'ee daughfers sfaried living in his hegsz gs a ie-na. ii 5-é mamhs prier 5'9 i‘he dare 9f incidgnf g? ihg mani‘niy reni- of Rs.50/-i ihe faiefui day, when he rammed house from his wcrk in ’i‘he evening, a cused, his wife and his Three daugivifers were inside ‘iheir room and door of ‘ihe mom were closed. Afier- somei'ime he heam‘ The screams of Sis ahin Bai, younger dough‘ier of ihe deceased & accused and she came ouf f {rhe room. On hearing 'H'xe screams, he along with his wife came ou‘i o fheir room. When he eniered roam of i‘he accused/appeiianf, he saw ho? he was sifting om a cc'r, he enquired from fine accused as io wine? he as done and why he is quarreiing wifh his wife, bu? he did no? repiy. He sa thm‘ Ramkcii was in burn? condi?ion and her mo doughfers were aiso in ihe i oom. In ?he mean?ime, Ramkali came oui- of i’he room and So? near ?he di? h mean? for dumping garbage. Thereaf'ier, he informed 'ihe Sarpanch of e viiiage. Therefore, from ?he above evidence cf Awadhram (PW-3L who ii: an independen? wifness, i’r is esiabiished ?ha? a? L 4 \c A L r__c ?he ?ime of inciden‘i‘, The acd used/appellan? was in 'i'he roompowi. Lu?! ”Nice P.T.O. ;1:‘'u.~i._A..__v . a i n . h XI-HC—78 EW,W,W . WW a3 zoo WW(W> mam WWW WWEWW %31%wm mmwm .‘y Ramkaii received The Jurn injuries inside 'rhe roam and she, in $12 dying deciamfion EXP—8 recorded by PW-7 Shri Ashok Tiwari, Execufive Magisfm‘ra, has cai'egoricaiiy sfa‘ied ?ha1' her husband affer quarreiiing wia‘h hzr f§1rew a burning kerosene iamp on her, as he used +0 doubi‘ her fideiify. PW-7 Shri Ashgk Tiwar'i, Execu‘l‘ive Magisi'mfe, who recorded 1315 dying deciarai'ion has c‘afegoricaiiy sfm‘ed The? fhe doci'or- gave The cer‘rificm‘e fhaf Ramkaii was in a fi? S'i'a‘i'e of mind “is give sfai’emen‘i‘ and in fhe iasf, i'he doci‘or gave The certificafe i+ a? i'he fhunib impression cf Ramkaii couid no? be obiained on accounf cf fhe faci' i'hai‘ her fhumbs were in burn? condifion. in inecross-examinafian cf any wii‘ness, defence has my} been abie ‘i'o elici‘? any circumsfance, hich goes To show ‘ihm‘ Ra’mkaii gave dying deciarafion in order To impii afe The accused in a faise case or she was hawm any grudge agams+ f e aceused/appei an? on ihe confrar'y dying deciaranon of Ramkai: is corr- oomfed by the ewdence of PW-3 Awadhr'am. Accused/ onpeiinni who we in +§ee room when Ramkai' susmined burn injuries om‘ he has no? expiai ed m his sim‘emeni under Sechon 313 of ihe Cr P C as 'i‘o how Ramkah susi‘ med burn inJuries The accused was ‘i‘he bes" pe. son i'o explain as i'o how fh deceased sus‘iained burn injuries because a? ?he Time when Ramkaii receiv d burn injuries, he was presenf in The room. Moreover, receiving of burn in uries by throwing a burning kerosene iamp on §amkaii siands corroborafed y circumsianiiai ewdence aiso because fhe burni'c oihes fanen info posse‘sion by The Inves‘hgm‘mg Officer from The piace of occurrence were sen‘i for chemico! examinofion fo Forensic Science - Labora'iory,,5a9ar, from wher repor'i EXP-24 has been received, in which ii nos been menfioned iha? smell of kerosene was preseni or? ihepgumt sari n ? XI-HC—78 mawA‘ mw,m,m mam WWW mmmm WWW%WW %3T%11311%¥T o ,WW(W) ,F (Ar?icie-A), bum? bbuse b ’oo‘h‘ie, which was being use Therefore, from '?he evidence of Awadhmm {PW-3), who reached an fhe .amkali in burn? condifion and dso Tha? ?§1e aupled wifh The circumsfantiai evidence the? as s of deceased smeH of kerosene was present re recovered froi’n ‘3'he piece {if occurrence :lara‘l’ion cf Ramkcli esfablishes beyond aii reasonable doubfs +haf ‘the ascused was fhe awhor of fhe crime in quesfion and fa 'rhis ex‘renf, we d’o no? find any Megalify or irreguierify in The judgmen‘? of ihe iriai Court Learned counsel for received burr. injuries on 24. 27.10.19§7 and in a quarrei Rr‘ficie-B), burn? pefi'icoa'r (Ari-icie-C), giass d as a 1am? (Arfide-D), cap aiong wifh wick. scene a’f occurrence, saw F accused was si‘h‘ing on a cc? c per FSL répom" in The cio‘fhe Kerosene lamp wifh wick we caupled wifh 'rhe dying de‘ ihe accused/appeiian‘i’ argued ‘iha‘? Rcmkaii 10.1997 an& she succumbed fo 'ihe injuries on in a hem cf passicn fhe accused Threw The ‘ \ ML burning kerosene iamp on Rgnkoii, as a resui? of which shase? abigze and received burn injuries and uiiimafeiy succumbed To fhose burn injuries. Therefore; the in'ieni'ion i'o cause deaih of Rcmkaii cannoi’ be aii‘ribufec‘ fa the accused/appeiicnf. Eui, ihe argumeni‘ advanced by iecrned counsel for "ihe accused/appellan? is devoid 12f merif, for 'Z'he reason The"? ii- is 'l'rue fha‘i ini‘riaily ihe accused/’appelian‘. esed fa deuh‘i ‘lhe fideli‘ly of his wife Ramkali and in a quarrel he ihrew i'he aurning kerosene lamp on her and when Ramkaii si'cried burning on accoum‘ of fhrcwing of kercsenc lamp en her, ‘i'he accused did nc‘i fry To save her, on “the conirary when Awadhram (PW—3) came and enquired abou‘i‘ him; he insfead of infervening ‘io save Ramkali,§g§@id fha'i’ XI-HC-78 . ~o‘o..oo. g1 200 wm(W> W$rféwi65 WWW mmwm WW WW éamm £9? her die. Th§s conducf 0' gseffing Ramkaii cbiaze by 1+: ivy 'ko exf§nguish #he fire. Ti dea+h of deceased by se‘H'ing Inthg result, we dc Judgment of fhe ‘frial Cour-1*. be dismissed and i? is‘, accord Sd/- 5. L.C. BHADOO Judge \t N‘- f The accused/appe!!anf shows fha‘r even affer- ~owing burning kerosene lamp on her, he eid no‘l' i 1erefore, fhe infen‘tion of fhe accused +0 cause her- on fire is esfabiished. 3 net find any iiiegali‘ry er infirmiw in the The appeal is devoid of merit same is liable fo \ ngly', dismissed. l ;/ Sd/— V.K. Shrivastava ’* Jude 7 y— 3am, WET@,W