I'll'1 HIGH COUJRT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'ble Shri Rajeev Gupta. C.J. & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha. J. Criminal Appeal No. 1008 of 1992 Ganju Yadav ^ Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh) JUDGMENT For consideration Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV GUPTA Sd/- Chief Justice Post for Judgment--_Z^/09/2010 < Sd/- Juage 2^/09/2010 •^MS»:& 'sSsSSfi :i .9. /^ (^;/ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'ble Shri Raieev Gupta, C.J. & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Criminal Appeal No. 1008 of 1992 Ganju Yadav son of Tahalram Yadav, aged 20 years, Kirana Shop Keeper, R/o Village: Kodwa, P.S. Bhatapara, District Raipur (M.P.) (Now Chhattisgarh) Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Stateof Chhattisgarh) (Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure^1973) Appearance: Mr. Atul Pandey, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State. JUDGMENT (23.09.2010) Following judgment of the Court was delivered by Sunil KumarSinha, J. (1) Appellant- Ganju Yadav stands convicted u/s 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by the Additional Session Judge, Baloda Bazar in Sessions Trial No. 297/90 on 30 of September, 1992. (2) . The facts, briefly stated, are as under:- Deceased- Chamru Verma was the cousin of village Sarpanch- Baburam Verma. On 19.7.90 at about 9.30 a.m., he \ was going to see his field in village Kodwa. As soon as he ../"^ Criminal Appeal No. 1008 of 1992 reached near Kewatpara Chowk, the appellant came from his back side and assaulted him by lathi. Chamru Verma fell down on the road. Thereafter the appellant gave blows by tangia on his head. Chamru Verma received multiple .injuries and succumbed to those injuries on the place of occurrence. The incident was witnessed by Mehatarin Bai (PW-1) and Allahah (PW-2). Mehatarin Bai immediately rushed towards the house of village Kotwar Mangaldas (PW-3). She met him on the way to his house. She narrated the story to Kotwar Mangaldas. Mangaldas called his nephew Kotwar Dilipdas (PW-4), who was also briefed about the incident. Dilipdas lodged the First Ihformation Report (Ex.-P/2). The Investigating Officer reached'to the scene of occurrence, :gave notice (Ex.-P/S) to the Panchas and prepared inquest (Ex.-P/5) on the body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was sent for its post-mortem to Primary hlealth Centre, Bhatapara, where the post-mortem examination was conducted by Dr. A.D. Purena (PW-8), who found the following external injuries on the body ofthe deceased:- (i) Crushed wound of8 cmx2 cm x deep to the cranial cavity on theleft side of occipital region; (ii) Crushed wound of8 cm x2 cmx5 cm on the left side of upper part of neck; (iii) Crushed wound of15cm x6cm x deep to the cranial cavity on the left side of the skull; (iv) Crushed wound of14cm x4 cm x deep to the cranial cavity on the left portion ofthe skull; (v) The left ear-pinna was completely cut off and detected. The margins of the cut portion were regular; (vi) Some portion of brain (cranial material) was crashed. It has come out from the cranial cavity & Criminal Appeal No. 1008 of 1992 (vii) Left parietal bone, frontal bone, occipital bone and left temporal bone were broken into multiple pieces. The Autopsy Surgeon opined that all the injuries were ante-mortem. The injury on the ear was caused by sharp edged weapon and the other injuries on the skull were caused by hard, blunt and sharp object. The cause of death was syncope caused by excessive haemorrhage on account of the above injuries. It was hQmicidal in nature. The post-mortem report is Ex.-P/S. The appellant was arrested from Akaltara at about 7.00 p.m. on the same day. He was wearing blood stained cloths and was having tangia (Article-A) and lathi (Article-B)with him. The blood stained articles were seized from the possession of the appellant vide seizure memo Ex.-P/10. His cloths, baniyan (Artide-C) and loongi (Article-D) were also seized by seizure memo Ex.-P/11. The blood stained articles and blood stained soil etc. were sent for their chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar, from where, a report Ex.-P/15 was received. According to the F.S.L. report, blood stains were found on tangia (Article-A), lathi (Article-B), baniyan (Article-C) & toong/' (Artiele-D) and blood stained soilseized from the place of occurrence. After completion of usual investigation, the charge-sheet was filed in the Court of concerned Magistrate, who in turn committed the matter to the Court of Sessions Judge, Raipur, from where, it was received on transfer by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, who conducted the trial and convicted & sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. v Criminal Apueal No. 1008 of 1992 (3) The conviction of the appellant was based on the testimonies of two eye-witnesses namely Mehatarin Bai (PW-1) and Allahah (PW-2). (4) Mr. Atul Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, argued that the evidence of two eye witnesses (Mehatarin Bai -PW-1 & Allahah -PW-2) are not reliable, therefore, the conviction based on their testimonies cannot be sustained. (5) On the other hand, Mr. Akhil Agrawal, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the State, opposed these arguments and supported the Judgment passed by the Sessions Court. (6) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records ofthe sessions case. (7) Mehatarin Bai (PW-1) is the resident of same village. She deposed that on the fateful day at about 9-10.00 a.m., deceased- Chamru Verma was coming from the side of Kewatpara. Ganju Yadav (appellant) was coming behind him. Ganju Yadav assaulted the deceased by lathi in front of the house of Kewatjhuru. After assaulting by lathi, he also assaulted the deceased by tangia. Ganju Yadav ran away towards his house after the assault and he also took the weapons [lathi & tangia) with him. Chamru Verma fell down on account of injuries sustained by him and died on the place of occurrence. She immediately rushed to the house of Kotwar '•••^ /, K/ ,eS§&. 1 '^^f Criminal Acoeal No. 1008 of 1992 Mangaldas (PW-3). Mangaldas met her on the way. She narrated the entire story to Mangaldas, who said her to go to the place where the dead body was lying. Thereafter Mangaldas came along with Dilipdas (PW-4). When the appellant was assaulting the deceased, the deceased was saying to the appellant as TKT W^ . Dilipdas (PW- 4) went to the police station to lodge the report. (8) Allahah (PW-2) deposed that deceased- Chamru Verma was brother of Sarpanch Baburam. On the fateful day, he met with the deceased near Chabutra in the village. Ganju Yadav (appellant) and Indram also came near the Chabutra. At that time Ganju Yadva was holding a lathi & tangia. Ganju Yadav abused the Sarpanch and uttered the words that he would kill him. Thereafter Ganju Yadav went from that place (Chabutra}. Deceased- Chamru Yadav also ^ro-m 4^ went/that place towards his field. They went towards the village school. After 10-20 minutes some ladies came from that side crying that W ^MT. He immediately rushed towards the school. When he reached near the house of Rambali, he saw that appellant- Ganju Yadav was assaulting deceased- Chamru Verma. by tangia. Thereafter Ganju Yadav went towards his house. hle took the tangia &/a /with him. The above witnesses have been put to lengthy cross- examined by the defence, but the defence has not been able to elicit any such circumstance, on which, either their testimonies may be Criminal Atipeal No. 1008 of 1992 discarded or it may be said that they are falsely implicating the appellant in crime in question. We find that the versions of these witnesses are corroborated by the contents of the F.1.R. (Ex.-P/2) lodged by Kotwar- Dilipdas (PW-4) who was duly briefed by Mangaldas (PW-3). Mangaldas was briefed by eye-witness - Mehatarin Bai (PW-1). The evidence of Mehatarin Bai (PW-1) & Allahah (PW-2) are further corroborated by the medical evidence of Dr. A.D. Purena (PW-8) who conducted the post-mortem examination and found multiple crushed injuries on the skull of the deceased and he also found that one ear-pinna of the deeeased was completely cut. The learned Sessions Judge has relied on the testimonies ofthese two witnesses (PW-1 & PW-2). (10) After going through the entire evidence on record, particularly the evidence of these two witnesses (Mehatarin Bai -PW-1 & Allahah -PW-2), we are satisfied that their evidence wa.s trustworthy and the Sessions Judge has rightly relied on their testimonies for convicting the appellant for commission of murder of deceased- Chamru Verma. It was a day time murder of about 9-10.00 a.m. in the village itself and the presence of the villagers (witnesses) at that time near the village-chowk was quite natural. They had seen the incident from a very short distance. Though it was argued that the witnesses are not reliable, but no reasons have been assigned for that. The two eye-witnesses were natural witnesses, they had seen the incident from a very short distance which took place in day time. 7 Criminal Aopeal No. 1008 of 1992 Their evidence was duly corroborated by the other materials available on record. Therefore, there is hardly any reason to interfere with the finding of conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge on the basis of above two eye-witnesses. \ (11) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in this appeal. The appeal filed by the appellant, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hepeby dismissed. The appellantis on bail. He is directed to surrender immediately to undergo the sentence imposed against him. Sd/- Chief Justice ^/nai—^i-wv^^f Sunil Kumar Judge vatti