A£^__^ 7S HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Apoea! No. 202/2«001 Agnu Prasad Vs. State of Chhattisgarh JudgmeRt for consideration^ ^•' Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge Hon'ble Shri Justice L.C. Bhadoo Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge Postfor^.10-200S Sd/- 56-10-2006 HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Division Bench) Coram : Hon'bte Shri L.C. Bhadoo & Hon'bte Shri V.K. Shrivastava, JJ CrimiRa! Appeal No. 202/2001 APPELLANT fisnu Prasad, s/o. Banju Satnami aged 23 years, resident ofvillage Piparmati, P.S. Chowki Pandatarai (Kunda P.S.), Dist. Kawardha, Chhattisgarh. Versus RESPONDENT Stats of Chhatiisgarti, through Police Station: Kunda, District. Kawardha, CG. Present:- Shri K.K. Singh, leamed eounse! for the appsllant. Shri U.N.S. Deo, tearned Additional Pubiic Prosecutor v/ith Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. JUDGiVSENT (Delivered on rz7 October. 2006) The judgmsnt of the Court was delivered by Vijay Kuiftar Shrivastava, J. Ths Additionai Sessions Judge, Mungeli, Sessions Division BHaspur, found the appeiiant - Agnu Prasad guilty of Uie offsnce punishabie under Sections 302 and 201 of the indian Penal Code. The appeliant was sentsnced to undergo imprisonment for iife and Rigorous imprisonment for three years respectively wth fine and defauit stiputafen vid®judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29-11-2000 passed in Sessions Triai No.358/99. 2) Prosecution vsreion as unfoided during frial, in brief, is that on 24/08/1999 Mohar Das Manikpuri (since deceased) st around 2.00 p.m. ^=:_... _-.-._..._. was on way to viliage Kunda. Whsn Mohar Das rsached near the Tube-well, appeltant caught him and in order to taks revsnge on account of previous animosity injured and kilied him by throttiing and after pouring kerosene oii on his body set the dsad body OR fire. Cattle feeder Tuisiram who was grazing his goats near that fieid was inside ths fieid having crop of sugareane. He heard the cries of Mohar Das. When he came outsids the fisid, he saw ths appsliant buming the bociy of Mohar Das with mateh- sticks. He ateo saw that ths appslisnt aftsr burning the body of Mohar Das v/snt to his house. He apprised ail these facts to Gokaran Das. Gokaran Das gave infcrmation to deceased's cousin Sumiran Das. Sumiran Das after narrating the mattsr to others, along with some of the viilagerewent to the spot sr,d saw the dead body of hiscousin MoharDas. 3) On 24/08/1 %9 Sumiran Das lodgsd mwg intimafion and Srst information report at Police Sub-station - Pandatarai. D.P. Tiwari, Sub- inspsctor of Police, after rscording merg infimation and first InformatioR report went to the spot to conduct the inquest and to investsgats the crime. After summoning the witnesses and in pressnce of those •A'iSnesses hs conducted inquest, prepared inquest rsport and forwarded the dead body of h4ohar Das for autopsy to Primary Hsaith Centre, Pandan'a whers Dr. V.P. Jaisw'a! conductsd the autopsy. On postmortem, he found that ths cause of death was asphyxia due to throtliing. He aiso found postmortsm bum and soms ante mortem injuries. He dsscribing aii the injuries and other factore noted by him during postmortem, prepared autopsy reporfand aiong with bumt cloftes found on the dead body sent his report to Polics Sfation. During investigstion spot map v/as prepared. On msmorandum of appeltent containsr containing some kerosene was recovsred and ssteed. From the spot, burnt articies, sarth having smsil of Efri l-i' NlTtT- ksrosene and piain earth wsrs recovsred and seteed. Statomente of witnesses underSsction 161 of tho Cr.P.C., have been rscorded. Articiss recovered wers sent to ForeRsic Science Laboratory, Sagar for chemicai examination. Assistant Chemica! Examiner after analyzing those articies found pressnce of kerosens on earth having smei! of ksrosene, burnt ciothes, ash, hair and the iiquic! found in the container. After invsstisation charga shsst wss isd in the Court of Judicia! R4agistrate Fjrst Class, Mungeli, who committed ths case to the Court of Ssssions for triai. 4) Lsamsd Additiona! Sessions Judge, framed chargs under Section 302 and 201 of the i.P.C. against the appeiiani, the same was read over and expiained to hi'm who a&jured the guilt. Although in his exami'nation he did not deny that when decsased Mohar Das was onWayto Kunda, af ihat time hs was fhsrs at a distance, but his plea was ftat he was at a !ong distance near the school. His dsfsncs is that Tuisiram has faiseiy impiicated him in this cass due to animosity. 5) Leamed friai Court relisd on ths statement of 'A'jfness Dhanukram (P.W5) who has disciosed in his statement that soon before Mohar Das was kil!ed, hs was followed by the appeilant and witness Tulsiram (PW/2) who in his statement rsvealed that he hsard the screams of Mohar Das and v/hen he came out from the fieid, he saw appeiiant burning the body of Mohar Das and ofher cireumstances heid the appeiiant guilty for comiRitting fhe offence punishabte undsr Sections 302 snd201 ofthe !PC and accordingiy sentsnced hi'm. 6) Dr. V.P. Jsiswa! (PW/6) in hte statement deposed that he conducted postmortem on the dead body of Mohar Das OR 25/08/1999, face, throat, chest, stomach, ieft forearm, isft hand and right fore-arm y/Qre found burnt. Burnt found on th®body was postmortenL Scor$hed -i W-s^t-i 4 ^?1"^"^''^' ~"'l], L? scaip hair was also present. He also found the following injuries on his body: "1) Abrasion 2 x 2cm on right cheek. 2) Contusion -1.5cm x 1 cm on left side of neck. 3) Contusion 2cm x 1 cm on right side of neck upper portion. 4) Confusion 2 cm x 2 cm beiow above injury No.3. 5) Contusion 5cm x2 cm on right shoulder rsgion. 6) Contusion 4 cm x4cm on right pit arm. 7) Abrasion 2 cmx 2 cm on base of right thumb. 7) He further deposed that cn internai examination he found congssd trachea and iungs. Cause of death of the deceased v/as due to throttiing and contusion was due to pressure of hand fingsrs. The dsath was horascidal in nsture. Deceased Mohar Das died due to asphyxia as a resuit of throttling and his body was burnt aftsr his death. From his cross sxamination nothing has been elicited which may lead te discrsdit his sfatsment, thsrsfore, from the medica! evidence it has been established that the deceased Mohar Das died as a result of asphyxia due to throttling, hte death was homicidaiand after his deatt his dead body was burnt. 8} No ons v/itnessed throttiing by appeltent, therefore, the case in fact rests on circumsiantiai svidence avaiiabte on rscord. No doubt, conwction can be bassd soleiy on circumstantial evidence, but it rsquires to be tested on touchstone of faw iaid down by the Hon'bis Apex Court. To convict a pereon on circumstantiai. evidence, that evidsnce must be cogentiy and firmiy establishsd, should bs of a conclusivs tendency unsrringiy pointing towards guiit of the accused, when taken together shouid form a complets chain Whers there is no sscaps from the conclusron fhat wittiin ail human probabiiify the crime was commjtted by ni I1 ll ;1?^ the accused and thers shouid be no room for othsr hypothesis than that of the guirt of the accused. !t ss not necessary that countiess cireumstances should be there, law only requires that sven if only one circumstaRce is present that must bs strongconclusive.and incapabie of any other hypothesis than that ofthe guilt ofthe accussd. ^ 9) Dhanukram (PW/5) in his statsment has depossd that he saw Mohar Das going towards Kunda. He aiso saw appeliant foilowing Mohar Das having a container in his hand, sms!l of ksrosene oi! was coming from the cap of ths container. Appellant did not deny ths factin his examination, but gavs expianation that hs was not foilowing Mohar Das, but was at a quite iong distance nsar Uie school. Admittediy when Mohar Das was within his vision, he was bound to expiain how and who kiiied Mohar Das and in absence of his sxpianation, this is a c!inching circumstancs involving ths appsiisnt in the crims. 10) Tuteiram (PW/2) in his sfatement depossd that at around 2.00 - 2.30 pm when he was grazing his goats near sugarcane fisid he heard the scrsams of Mohar Das who was raising aiarm "Dowdo Dowdo". He saw ths appeiiant who opened the shirt of Mohar Das and was buming his body. Appeiiant was aiso toeping conteinsr of ksrossns by his side. Thsreafter, appeiiant went to his house. He came to viliage and apprised Gokaran Das. At hte instance, vii!age Kofcvar Sumiran Das was ca!led. Gokaran Das apprised him with the facte, v/ho along v/ith Tijau Kewat, Ram Anui Ns!,-M3niram Harijan went to the spbt and sav/ dead body of Mohar Das v.'ho was wearing shoss and nsar his body one umbrelia was kept that v/as also bumt. Although this witness has besn examined at isngth, but nothing substantiaS has been siicitsd in his cross examinatien so as fo disbelisve his above vsrsion. IeZ/d'x3 UIOJ.3 '(OtiN^S "®««1'd'G Aq pSACud ueeq seij pe( siiji •p&Aieosj uesq seq ,osjsifl (£Z/d'X3) yodej pue zz/d'^3 apJA -'eBeg •-i9d oi i"ss "8sq SAB4 ss|0i}je essq} |jv '(Q/AAd) i®l?"">i ^o }usiuete?s stj} Aq peAOJd uesq seq ^^d'xg •(oi./Md) PSMil 'd'Q ^o }ueui3}eis siB Aq pSAOJd ussq SAey OZ/d'S'6t/d"sx3 •fr'|./d-'X3-spiApsp8||03 ussq 9Asi| SBQ jeyoi^ pssesosp ,o Apoq eisuo punoj ssq}o|o 'oz/d'x3 oiusui sjnziss spjA paass uesq eABij 4»JS9 uiejd pue sussojs^ ,o jjsius BuiAey yyes }ods 04} luoy '61./d'x3 SPIA psziss useq sAey qse pus Apoq pesp siji AOjsq punoj seiflop }Ujnq •JS.'AO} ||eius suo 'siisjqiun auo (zi. •sesssu?!A piesejo^e eij} ^o s;usuia}S}s JBJO 54} e}KJoqojjo3 OSJE qusiunoop essifl ij}os '(ol/AAd) u&wi •d-a pue (!./Md) seauej!iun9 Aq psAojd ussq sAey (z/d'xg) podsj UOBBLUJOJU! ?sjg pue (j,/d'x3) uoseiugui BJSN •sjsBBji.iA eq) pesudds pue SLueo ^ueppui sifl Buisssi4. -'syB uoos iuej!s|ni }eij} ps.} sq} 8}SJoqojjoo sasssu^M sssij} qioq p s?u8ius}S}s sqt 'sjo^sjeiji •sousp!A8 .iissjl tipejosip Aeiu qoiy/B A}!UIJI}U! qons UJQJJ jsyns }ou op sesseu?w. essifl 4}oq jo s}ueuie}S}S 'sjsq} (usssjd sem sussoje}; p ||sius pue iiunq SSM oqw SBQ JBIJOM p Apoq peep eifl puno^ Ae^} ejsq.iA }0ds sy? o? }ue,v, sjstjio 4}iM BUOJB ®H 's-'y uo Apoq eijt }ss ssa j54Qj/\j uo jio suesoj8}| Buunod Aq nuBy ?eij} s-u.iq pssudds uieiisinj. •sjsijt tus/sft 34 'ejo.fsjsy} 'iuiq psjjso SBQ uejeijog p esnoy aij} ufojj luejjSjni )|30p QO'S - OO'Z ?s {54} pesodgp }USIUS(B;S 514 ui (((,/AAd) sea usjiiung 'A(ueA o? }ods sifi 0} }US/A SBG uejiiuns JBM}O» sBe||!A 'A(ueA 0} luiy pe^'se pue SBQ uejiujns JB>V40>| sBsjjiA psjieo SH 'sea jeqora Buiujnq tU!i< usss psq si-j •ejy uo Apoq sii) }ss 'SBQ jeqo^ uo eussojsij Buunod Aq peseuci "uBy }BI)} luiq pssudde pue siueo uiajisini 'esnoq siij ui se,w 34 USIJM >joo|o 0"e punoje ?e }ei(} pssodep ?USUIS}B?S siy ui (s/AAd) sea usjeiioo (i l. 9 presencs of kerosens on ths earth recovered from the spot, bumt ciothss of the dsceassd and ash havs been proved. Ail these facts clearly established that the body was bumt by pouring kerosene oi!. 13) Aforesaid ocular and documentary evjdsncs and circumstancss ars reiiabie and trustv/orthy. Above evidencs and circumstences when taken cumulatively, form a complete chain, and that chain unfoided and proved that appeliant followed Mohar Oas, when found him in a ioneiy place, caught him and caused his death by throttiing and after his death to screen himsslf from- legai punishment caused disappearance of evidence of offence by pouring kerossne on dead body of Mohar Das and setting it on fire. 14) We ars of the considered opinton that iearned trial Court correctiy appreciated the svidence on record and held ttie appeliant guilty fcr committing the offence punishabis under Sections 302 and 201 of the indian Psnai Code and accordingiy sentenced him, therefore, no interference in the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the tria! Court is calted for by this Court under its appsl!ate jurisdiction. 15) In ths result, the appsal being devoid of msrit is !iabie to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. i:- Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge s\ Ol'laju