HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Division Bencsh) CORAM : HON'BLESHRI VIJAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, J. AND HON'BLE SHRI DIUP RAOSAHEB DESHMUKH, J. ' CRIMINAL APPEAL N0. 120 OF 1992 AppeUant versus Non-Applicant Bhagwaa Slngh, aged 22 years, S/o Govind Siagh, R/o Maagora-Patpariapara, PoUce Station Khadgaon, District Sarguja (M.P.). State ofMadhya Pradesfa. Mr. R.S.Marhas, coimsel forfhe appeBaat. Mr. J.D.Bajpai, Additional E'ubUc Prosecutor for the a6n- applicaat/ State. JUDGMBNT (DeUvered on 9th Aueust. 20051 PER DILIP RAOSAHEB DESHMUKH, J. This appeal is directed agaiast fhe judgaient dated 12- 12-1991 aeUyered in Sessions Trial No.191/91 by Shri M.C.Jain, Additional ^Ju(Ige to the District and Sessions Judge, Sai^uja, whereby the appeUaatwas con-ucted under Section 302 ofthe Indian Penal Code for com.mittiag niiirder of Deorati Bai aad was seiitenced to imprisoiunent for life. 2. Briefly stated the prosecution stoiy is that the appeUant Bhagwan Sin.gh. had worked as a labourer whUe diggiag a Well for Mohaa Siagh. On 14-6-1991 at aboutS P.M., Deorati Bai, Wife of Mohaa Siagh, carrying a Tia, had gone to fhe house of the appellant to feteh DALDA. The appeUant asked for his wages from Deorati Bai, whereupon she started abusiag him filfluly and left for her house. Enraged by fhis the appeUaat foUowed her and near the Nala struck Deorati Bai fhrice on fhe head by a wooden Peedha, as a result of which, she feU down iu the water •aad shouted, The appeUant dragged Deorati Bai out of the Nala aad further assaulted her by fhe woodeu Peedha on fhe right leg aud kuee several tiines. Bramtla Siagh, P.W.-l and Pyare Siagh, P.W.-2, who on heariiig fhe noise reached the spot soon afterasked the appeUaiit who told thein fhat he had assaulted Deorati Bai by fhe wooden Peedha. Deorati Bai also told the aboveiaentioned witnesses that Bhagwaa Singh had assaulted her by a wooden Peedha. Bramha Siagh, P.W.-l and Pyare Siagh, P.W.-2 saw that Deorati Bai had sustaiued tujuries ia the head, nose aad right leg and was bleediag froni fhe nose. They took Deorati Bai to her house. She succumbed to fhe iajuries on fhe same day. 3. The appeUaiit went to Police Station Khadgawan and lodged F.I.R., Ex.P-12on 15-6-1991 at 11.30 A.M. Assistant Sub- Insp'ector, Bechu Siugh,. P.W.-5 reached the spot and prepared PaiichauaiiiaofthedeadbbdyvideEx.P-15. Blood stained soil, plaui / ' soil, ^soine broken bangles and a Tra were seized vide Ex. P. -1 fi-oni the ••*"• place ofoccurrence i.e. near Khariya Nala. One wooden Peedhawas seized at the instaace offhe appeUant on 16-6-1991 vide Ex.P-3. Dr. ZT^ (^ K.L.Baajare, P.W.-4, conducted fhe post niorteiu exauiiaation aad foiind the foUowing injuries on Deorati. Bai : - MBf« (i) SweUiug over right panetal, teinporal aud occipital region of head. Size varied froia 8 cin x 5 cm. to 4 cin x 4 cni. (u) SweUiag overiuiddle offorehead. Size 7 ciux 5 cin. / (ui) SweUing over upper 173rd of right leg, fracture of right tibia aad fibula 7 cin below the upper end ofbone. He foT.uid fi-acture of the occipital bone aad fhe right teiaporal bone wifh blood clots as weB as laceration preseat on the occipital region. He also foi.uid blood clots over fhe occipital and right teinporal region. There was sweUiug at the right side of chest at fhe 9th, 10th aud 1 1th rib at inid auxiUary luie wifh blood clots present at fhe side. He also foiuid fhat right tibia and fibula were fractured. In the opiaion of Dr. K.L.Baiyare, P.W.-4, niode of death was shock due to iajury on fhe occipital aud right teinporal region of fhe head and excessive heniorrh^e from. fhe bram. AU the iajuries, ia his opinion, were aate m.0rtein aad hoinicidal in nature. After coinpletion of mvesti^ation, fhe appeUaut was prosecuted luider Section 302 of fhe Indian Penal Gode. The appeUaut claimed trial, pleaded false uaplication and led no evidence. 4. The trial Judge, relying upon the testimony of Bramha Siagh, P.W.-l and Pyare Siagh, P.W.-2 regardiag haviag seeu ftie iryuied Deorati. .Aai and fhe extra judicial confession niade by the appeUaat on the spot aiid fhe-dyirig declaratioa of Deorati Bai coupled with fhe medical evidence Qf Dr. K.L.Banjare, P.W.-4, convicted fhe appeUaat uiider Section 302 ofthe Indian Penal Code aad sentenced him. as aforesaid. •^ 5. Mr, Marhas, leamed counsel for the appellaut, appearmg as amicus curiae, has not assaUed the iiudiag offhe trial Judge fhat ftie appeUaat had caused the death of Deorati Bai. He has oiily contended fhat, the appeUan.t was acting under grave aad sudden provocation on accoujit of the non-payment of wages as also fhe filthy abuses hurled at him by fhe deceased aud, therefore, the offence squarely faUs under Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Indiaa Penal Code and does not travel beyoad Section 304 Part II of the Indiaa Penal Code. He also contended that the appeUant was in. jaU. since 16-6-1991 i.e. for inore thaa 14 years., 6. On the ofher hand, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor has supported the judgment of fhe tnal Judge aad argued fhat fhe laaaner in which fhe appeUant repeatedly assaulted the old lady Deorati Bai by a wooden Peedha on the head causiag fi-actures on vital parts, and after Deorati Bai feU inside the water, dragged her outside aad fiulher assaulted her ia such a inanner fhat she sustained fi~actures on. right tibia as weU as fibula, leaves no rooin for any doubt that fhe act of the appeUaut was one of deliberadon and iatentional aad fhat the appeUant had coininitted niurder of Deorati Bai in cold blood. /. We Taasie. considered fhe nval subnussions. We have also ;one ferough fhe record of Sessions Trial No. 191/91. The testimoiiy of Dr. K.L.Baiijare, P.W.-4 pi-oves beyond doubt that Deorati Bai, an old lady of 60 yeara, had sustained fi-acture of the right panetal aad teinporal bone with blood clots uiideraeafh with sweUing over iiuddle of fiarehead and that death of Deorati Bai was hoinicidal and was 5 caused due to injuries on occipital aud right teinporal region due to excessive heinorrhage frova. fhe bram.. It is also bome out froiu fhe medical evidence fhat Deorati Bai had also sustamed fracture of fhe right tibia and fibula. 8. We have also considered fhe testimony o^Bramha Siagh, P.W.-l, who had reached fhe spotwhfle the appeUantwas assaultuig Deorati Bai. The testimony of Bramha Siagh, P.W.-l aad Pyans Siugh, P.W.-2 further estabUshes fhat Deorati Bai had made aa oral dyiug declaration before fhese witnesses that fhe appeUaut Bhagwan Siagh had assaulted her. The testuaony of these witnesses further estabUshes that, on being asked, the appellant had inade an. extra judicial confession before fhese witaesses. Their testLmony has stood unrebutted iu. cioss-exaaunation aad is faUy corroborated by the inedical evidence. Havuig fhus considered the evidence led by fhe prosecufion, we are of fhe considered opinion fhat fhe evidence led by fhe prosecution proves beyoad doubt that flie appeUant had caused fhe death of Deorati Bai. 9. The only question which reinaias to be considered is whefher fhe act of fhe appeUaat fatts wifhia Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Indiaa Penal Code, Learaed coiuisel for the appeUaiit diew our attentioa to para 4 of fhe testuaony of Bramha Siugh, P.W. 1 and ruade au''abortive attenipt to bring the case of ttie appellaut wifhia Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code by ar^guing that, non-paymeQt of wages aad the filfhy abuses enraged the appeUaat to such an extent that he uruntentionaUy caused the death ofDeorati Bai. However, fhe act offhe appeUant ia repeatedly assaulfing Deorati Bai on vital parts i.e. the head to such an extent S.Singh, that she sustaiaed fracture not oiily on flie right teruporai bone but •~a also on the occipital bone with excessive heinorrhflge froni braui and sweUing over iniddle offorehead aad sweUiagat fhe 9th, 10i11 aad 11th rib on right side ofchest at inid axUlfliy line with blood clots present aad further titie act of the appeUarit ia repeatedly assaulting Deorati Bai on ttie rightleg to svch au extent that she sustaiued fi-acture on right tibia aad fibula, cleariy iadicates fhat, fhe act of ttie appeUaat was one of deliberation aad the appeUaat iatended to cause the death of Deorati Bai, It is also pertment to note tfaat para 4 of the testimoay of Bramlia Siagh,P.W.-l shows ftiat Deorati Bai was aUeged to have abused fhe appeUaut at his house while icfusuig to pay wages whereas fhe incident occurred after fhe appeUant had foUowed her up to fhe Nala. Thus the act of fhe appeBant iii causitig the deafhof Deorati Baiwas not spontaneous after he was abused by Deorati Bai. It therefore caunot be said fhat ftie appeBaat was deprived of the power of self control by grave and sudden provocation. 10. Having fhus considered ftie evidence led by fhe prosecution in. its entirely, we are of fhe considered opinion fhat fhe appeUaat coin.mitted inurder of Deorati. Bai ia cold blood and was righfly convicted by ttie tnaljudge under Section 302 offhe Indian J;'enal Code. The coaviction of ftie appellaiit aad fhe sentence awarded by fhe trialJudge, fherefore, catl for no iuterference. The appeal is disinissed. Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge