\ $ \ \M\\||\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\|\\ 5» mm 89 / (Jail) c. J. P.‘ R.’ 1 1 /94/2,ooo (vaQ APPEAL OF PRISONER mk‘isgx‘x? Lima“, dime '41 Name W Fathersname Wyw W Wa‘aw éE' Res1dence QW m \“w Age 3yQ& ‘ Sentenced to Qawm WP WW §-\ \‘A q? Under section ‘3‘D’KWQL by 9M9qrmxvimmm\ "Wgj:W\b‘§-\ It 1s explamed to the pnsoner that 1f he states or Wishes to be represented by legal tLEpractmoner the Appellate Court W11] not proceed wrth the base for seve’l aays unless the legal practmorer appears If the legal practmoner does not appear Wlthln seven days he may not heard at all If the prlsoner states that he does not w1sh to be repre- sented b3 legal practxtroner the court may proceed at once wrth the case and W111 not be b11geq to grve a hearing to any legal practmoner who should appear I Date of Applrcatron for co‘py of Judgement Date on whlch copy recexved ' «iq 9f Date on which Appeal sent Whether the prisoner wishesfto be represented or not - Yes / No _ NwA r Noaletesr” Name..W..a&WmWu Conllnedin ‘ F Q. 1 - Jail ..... VY\’§) N ...?a¢ /l Law} Damn/z jet I 199C Forwarded to the L MAGISIM’PE Q$QTK km Wm $1‘A" togather whxch a copy of judgement or order assed 1n the mm“ case ?or avour tm \67‘ o trans; mtss1on to the proper Appellate Court. " $“T; ww “Lgk IRE, 3x t E (i EMA m W w “fa—x Dale of receiptvin... Date of receipt record to accompany the "Memo ofAppeal to the Appellate court y tNo, Forwarded to the te of eceipt pellate Cour Da r 1n Ap t , é x . " ‘ y‘ 2 p 2 l ?11’ ,l IL XI—HC—78 3a W, m, W algal ‘ $ql$ a ewuxagawé L7; 290* WW(W) WWEWW ‘ WWWW %3T%H3II%$T .‘ Division Bench: - : Hon’ble Shri L.C. Bhadoo & ‘ Hon’ble Shri Dhirendra Mishla, JJ. 1-3-2007:- Shri DR. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Ms Anita Singh, Advocate for the appellant. i ‘ Shri Ashish Shukia, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/ 1 ‘k respondent. Oral judgment dictated c n Dais. L.C. Bhadoo, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment o? conviction and order ‘ of sentence dated 14/11/95 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Manendragarh, District Surguja, in S.T. No.486l93 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellant guilty for commission of offence under Section 302 of the i.P.C., sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31g August 1993 at about 6 p.m. when Ramsai an Chain Singh were at their house, accused Ramdas along with his two da ghters went to their house and made extra judicial confession before the that he has committed murder of his wife with carpenter axe. Thereaft r, Anand Lal, brotheg‘of the accused, also came and said same thing. R msai asked Chain Singh to go to the house of the accused to ascertain veracity of the statement made by him. Therefore, Chain Singh, Amar Singh and Anand Lal went to the house of Ramdas and saw that body o Bandhwatolhin @ Gulbasiya was lying in P.T.O. l 1 J. XI-HC—78 to WWH” .Hm 200 WW(W) WW§WW éamm ° WWW WWW Wwm the poiice station Kelhari unde offence, in pursuance of that, l , ‘c ‘ nes and due to excessive haemorrhage and shock. The death was hom ‘ After completion of the i pourt of Additional Chief Judic committed the case to the Ses Additional Sessions Judge rece The prosecution in orc accused examined 8 witnesses under Section 313 of the Cr.P. against him in the prosecution has been falsely implicated in the house of the acCused. Therefore, Chain Singh reported the matter to r F.l.R. Ex.-P/1. After registering the crime, Station House Officer left for scene of occurrence, prepared inquest Ex.- ‘P/2 on the Vbody of Bandhwat<5ihinv@ Gulbasiya. He aiso prepared site ipian Ex.-P/3 of the place of occurrence. While in the police custody, the iaccused gave memorandum Ex.-P/4 regarding carpenter axe, weapon of ie got recovered carpenter axe, which was taken into possession under E):.-P/5. Shirt and Lungi of the accused were taken into possession under E .-P/6; Plain soil and blood stained soil as alsos6 broken pieces of glass bangles of the deceased were taken into possession under Ex.-P/7. Th body of the deceased was sent for post- mortem examination to the Pri ary Health Centre, Manendragarh where Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta (PW- ) conducted post-modem, prepared post- mortem report Ex.-P/9 in whic he opined that cause of death is due to grievous injuries, fracture of b ‘cidal in nature. nvestigation, charge sheet was tiled in the al Magistrate, Manendragarh, who in turn sions Judge, Surguja, from where learned ved the case on transfer for trial. ‘er to establish the charge against the Statement of the accused was recorded C. in which he denied material appearing evidence, stated that he is innocent and the crime. Learned Additional Sessions P.T.O. 5 XI—HC—78 HW,W,W 3 WW o....o.o.o.o... o..0‘. W 200 WW<W> WWEWW 1 mmwm wranam ¢ ‘ Judge after hearing learned counsel for the respective parties convicted and sentenced the accused as aforementioned. We have heard learned :ounsei for the parties Learned counsel for 1he accused/appeliant has not disputed i homICIdal death of the deceased Moreover, Dr. Suml Kumar Gupta (PW- i g)‘who conducted post-mortern on the body of the deceased, has stated i that 3 injuries were found on ':he body of the deceased, out of which, 2 injuries were on head and one injury was on knee. Cause of death was due to excessive haemorrhage and shock. Death was homicidal in 1 Chain Singh and PW-3 Ramsai have categorically stated that the ac used made extra judicial confession before 3them. Therefore, in view of he above evidence, it is established that ‘ death of the deceased was ho icidal in nature. As far as involvement of the accused/appellant in the crime in question is concerned, there is no direct or ocular evidence in this matter. The whole case rests on the circumstantial evidence i.e. extra judicial confession made by the accu ed before PW-1 Chain Singh and PW-3 Ramsai. In order to rest convi tion based on extra judicial confession the prosecution must establish t t extra judicial confession made by the accused was voluntary, promp and true. PW-3 Ramsai has stated that he is village patel. In the evening he along with his son Was at his residence, he was not well. At that time, ccused came to their‘fesidence along with his two daughters carrying th m in his lap. Just after he reached to his residence he touched his fe t and said that he be saved as he has committed murder of his wife that tlme brother of the accused Anand i nature. Apart‘from that, Lal reached there and helkd hat the accused has committed murder of P.T.O. '- P t J XI—HC—78 4 o W ‘...‘....o.o‘o.oo.o.o W 200 WW<WW WWW WWW WWEWWA mawf‘éam éawm g his wife. He asked his son 1‘0 go and find out the fact and report the PW-1 Chain Singh has corroborated the above i evidence and stated that the accused made extra judicial confession in his presence before his father. other of the accused Anand also reached there and said that the acc sed has committed murder of his wife. Thereafter, he went to the ho se of the accused and saw the body of his wife, at that time, she was br athing. They were making preparation to take her to the hospital but in the meantime, she succumbed to the injunes. matter to the police. ln cross-examinati n of these witnesses, nothing has been' elicited to make evidence oft ese witnesses unreliable or untrustworthy. Both the witnesses are indepe dent witnesses. it has not come in cross- examination that any pressur was exerted on the -_accused. Moreover, lodged the report Ex.-P/1 in Which it has been mentioned that the acc sed came to their house and made extra ‘ judicial confession, therefore, i view of the above evidence of these two witnesses and F.I.R., it is esta lished that the accused made extra judicial confession voluntarily, that to with all promptness and same was true. Moreover, when the accus was in the police custody, he gave ‘ memorandum Ex.-P/4 regardin the place where he kept carpenter axe, in pursuance of that he got re vered the same, which was taken into possession under Ex.-P/5. lt as been mentioned in Ex.-P/5 that blood spots were present on the car enter axe. The memorandum and seizure memo have been proved by In estigating Officer Nasayan Singh who has stated that the accused m memorandum (Ex.-Pl4) before him, in pursuance of that, carpenter axe was taken into possession at the instance of the accused und r Ex.-P/5. PW-5 Dirpal Singh has also proved memorandum and sei ure memo of carpenter axe. Therefore, P.T.O. i r a e xaamm$ma$km@f&mm§ WW(W) WW ...‘.‘.. 0‘00090~Oo00’ HE 200 mmwm extra judicial confession is corraborated by the circumstantial evidence i.e. recovery of weapon of offence i.e. carpenter axe at the instance of the l accused. mmffwm éKWW Ev f For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any illegaiity or infirmity in \ ?the judgment of the trial Court. ‘ i in the result, the ”appeal being devoid of merit is Iiable to be "s : dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. Sdl- :L.C§ Bhadoo ¢ Judge 5[ \z ‘