l^ i-1'li ^ APPELLANT: CEn Jail) HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH. BILASPUR Criminal Aooeal No.294 of 2004 Santoo ftam, S/o Hagaroo Ram Kosarey, \aged about 33 years, R/o Village Saniyari, Tehsil Patan, Distt. Durg (C.©.) RESPONDENT: Versus State ofChhattisgarh. {Appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973} Present: 11. .^^ AAr. Praveen Ohurandhar, counsel for the appellont. Mr. Sameer Beh<»r,Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. SirwleBench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J ORAL JUD6MENT (3-2-2009) 1. This appeal is directed against the Jud9tnent of conyiction &. order of sentence dated 12-2-2004 pcsssed by •t+ie 5 Additional 5essions Judge, Durg in Sessions Tridl No.l03/2003,whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge after- holding the appellant guilty for cofflmission of offence under Sections 307& 352 of the I.P.C. sentenced him to undergo R.I. for five years <S pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of finetofurther undergo R.I. for three months & to undergo R.I. for three months, respectively. 2. Judgment of conviction is challenged on th®ground that without any clinching & reliable evidence the Court below has convicted & sentenced the oppellant in the aforesaid monner cmd thereby. committed ille9ality. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13-2-2003 at about 3 p.m. at Village Stiniyari, the accused/oppelfant along with other co-accused persons assaulted injured Moolchand with sword and caused injuries. F.I.R. was lodged vide Ex.P-4 within 3 i- hours and the in^.ired was sent for . medical examination. l-1e wasexamined by E)r. S.K. Bhoi (PW-1) and nine injuries-toere found on his body vide Ex.P-1, outof which injury No.8 which : it^ -Liu.- .^-.-—1.^^ "i^^^ <f:,l M f e "tiiF-^ .. (^ was over the head wcs dangerous in noture. The injured was admitt'ed in the hospital. Blood stained cloth was sei2ed vide Ex.P-5 and spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-6. Fracture was also noticed on •riie bodyof the injured. v 4. After completing the investigcition, charge sheet was filed before the Judicial AAagistrate, First Class, Durg, who in turn, committ'ed the case to the Court of Sessions, Duifg from where learned 5 Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, received the case on tnmsfer for triol. 5. Inorder to prove the guilt of^t+ie accused persons,the prosecution has examined as many gs eight witnesses. Stotements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313of the Cr.P.C.in which they have denied the circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence <& false implication. 6. After affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, the Court below has convicted & sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as also the record of the trial Court. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the oppetlant has not furnished bail bondsand aftercompleting the sentences imposed upon hiin, he has been released from jail. Learned counsel further submits that however, he chalienges the iegality of conviction of the appellant. He also submits that without any evidence the Court below has sentenced the appellant. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State/ respondent supported the impugned jud9ment and submitted that the evidence of Moolchand is supported by medicnl evidence - which is sufficierit for drawing inference that the appellant has commitfed the offence. • l0.in order to appreciate the contentionsof the parties and to prove the g'urtf of the appellant, I haye examined theevidence adduced^ on behalf of the Drosecution. ^ -g-w l . ; .]i3 ES&BJWUU /';1 .(" -•' -«d a .y .. .'^^ V 11. Injured Moolchand (PW-2) has stated in his evidence that the cypellant along with other co-accused persons assaulted him, firstly, co-accused Ashok assaulted him with swordover his head and thereafter, the present oppellant assaulted with syrord on different parts of the body viz., head, shoulder, homd, finger, wrist, legs, thereby his three fingers were amputated. He has been examined by Dr. S.K. Bhoi PW-I) and nine injuries were found over his body. He was adniitted in the hospital for more than 1 i months. His evidence is corroborated by the eyidence of Hemlal (PW-3) & Smt. Seetabai (PW-4). 1-lis fingers were nmputated and X-ray hosbeen done by Dr. Rajendra Prasad C'SW-5) who noticed fracture oj tibia vide Ex.P-7. 12. Defence has cross-examined the witnesses at length, but it has not been able to elicit onything in their cross-examination to discredit their testimony. Injured Moolchand (PW-2) has specifically dnd cnte9orically stated that the appellont has caused nBultiple and severe injuries to him. 13. On the basis of his evidence, the Court below has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Conviction and sentences of the appellant are based on legal evidencecmd the same is sustainable. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the judgment impugned, 14. Consequently, the appeal is !iable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. —.- SdA . T.P. Sha^flia Judge ^ •:^.