HI6H COURT OF CHHATTESe^RH AT BILASPUR CrimiriQl ADM<A No.1201 <rf 2003 Coram: HON'BLE MR.T. P.SHARMA & HON'BLE MR.N. (C.A6ARWAL, JJ. APPELLANT CIn Jail) RESPONDENT Scyijoy Pcxndey S/o Kri^rK^uwar l^ aged 28 years RA) near spinni^ mill colony LalS^iadcOT P/S Torwa I jdi^tt Bilaspur (C^) permonent address Bhikhanpur p/s Otodrl distt' lAalanda (Bihar) Verssus Starte of Chhattisgqrh ^irough P/S Torwa distt- Bilaspur (C^.) (CRMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 (2) OF THE CODE OF GRIAMNAL PROCEbUftE,l973) Present:- Mr^Uheerendra Pandey/counsel for the Gppellant. Mr.Sandeep Yaclav, beputy ^over'nment Advocate for the State. /^UD^MEhm (Passed on 25th February, 2010) Th®judgment of the Court was delivered bYT.P.Shorma. J.;- 1. ChaJlengs 'n this appeal is to the judgment of conviction ^! or^er of s»nt®nc® dated 27.6.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Ssssions Trial No.464/2001, vrfiereby & w^ereunder leaarned AddfNonaJ Sessions Judge after holding the c^pellant guilt/ for commission ef ca.itpable homicidal d®a1+i of deceased Saaitoshkumar* @ Babua 6ond arriountin9 te murder and illegal use of fire arm; convlct^d uncter Se^tton 302 of the Indkm Penal Code & Section 27 (l) of the Arms Act-, 19S9 artd^^^^s^ him to unclergo iwprisonment for life (md to poy fin» of^^^^^^ default of payment of fin®to further undergo rigowus ^Nsonwent^^^^^ two monthsand ri9orous imprisoniT ^tfor1^r@€years<mA^ Rs.lOOOA in default of paysnent of fine to further unctergo rigorovs imprisonmentfor two nionths. 2. Conviction is Impugned on the grpund thort- without ther®being cmy cllnching and credsble evidence sufficjent for conyjction €tfthe cppetlcuv^^^^^^^t^^ Additional Sessions Judge has conyicted and sent^cedNriw appelknitas aforementiorNBd and therefoy committBd illegatlty. r 3. Case of the prosecutson, in brief, is thcrt on the fal^^l dcsy o^^ about 9.30 p.m., the oppellGnt was standing at Uilkhiadan, ^ain Road, Bilaspur, deceased Scntoshkumar wos 90^9 1^ call or% MuNrti, ^e^ called by the appellant. TTi®(ypellanttookoutcoyntry-mcde^tsl^le^ ^iot fire ypon the deceased over his abdomen, he fBll down. <^ also present there^ they <h?o|< Ifie injured 1^ Dharam Ho^itQt, lBllaspiurflnc| mtiswrted Itie police. The potic^ reached to the &har^ Wosprtal, W Sub ^spector A.SPaikra 0:>W-6) recorded deh<iti najfcsht <^-^ SoBiitoshkumar vide Ex.P/7. H®has also recorded his statementynder Section 161 of ths Cod®of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short*th»Code') yide Ex.P/14. The injured was examined by DrA-.C.M^hriyQ ^^^^ BC.P/SA and f^und bullet oyer his abdornen and profvse bte^ ?^-«.--l|^:-:-r;- iminediately adwitted him in the male surgical ward for sur^c^^l^ the course of trsaitment, tteceased Sawto^temar die^ N^ ^^,^^ vsde ExP/10 Gnd mer<s intimation wxs recorcted vide &<.P/tt?t ^ifter ^:.^;,-...-:.^.;.;^-^-^,^',,:^:-^ summoning th®witnesses yide ExP/1,2, iNquest ov«p th®de^ bo^ ^ deoKau^id Santos^taiWQr* was prepared yide &<P/i3. t)<^d b<^ ®f^^^^ deceased vyas sent for- autopsy to bharam Hc^il^l, Btto^r ^^B?<;J¥6A. Autopsy wos conducted by Dr.N.S^andel (l^^victe Bd?^6^ foltewin^ symp'h?ms and jnjyrses over the body of the decBased, ,^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^-^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ i) Orte stitch wound over mid ^domir®!^^ si^8 cms^m^^ ^ Drainoge tubes were cyt ori bolfisi^s of pelysc reg^^^^^^^ f ii) One 3 cws. long bultet was found in^cte betw^n W verl^bra & sacral vertebra • • •• . . •—- •••. • - • •: -• ^•' • ••.•"•.••-•».'-;':.-:.::^^:^1:'----::';t^^;.:^.'-.. • •'.A ili) Blood was oozing froni Itie injuries . Jv) Small intestsne, Iwig intestine, LS vertebra a^ ces^n3rf wrtebra were injured. • • ^ • ••;-: . ••--.^.^^^^^^^^^^^ : • Mode of death uwas shock as a reaitt of bullet mjury arod death was homicidal m natyre. Btoodstained soll, pton soil €m4^ recoyered fromthe SffQt ykte ExP/9. Bl<»dstdrt^clo4l'i®s^of'rti®«tec«QSad ^.^^ .'-- and sealed bullet after autopsy were sei^sed vtde €x.P/t& ^ot n^ WG prepared by investigating officer vlde 6>cJ>^16. &uNng ^^^coyrSB ^f investigation, the q?pellont waas take^ irrh? cystocly, he m<^^^^^^^ statsment of country-mad®pistol vide ExP/1 andprodu<ad the scmte which wos seized from him vtde ExP/2. Bloodstained shirt of the appelJCOTt^^ ^ seized yide ExP/3. He was arrested yide &<P/4. f^rlwsri a^ spotinop yide Ex.P/5. Seized artkiles were ^^ for chemt€ate|>eaip^ 4. Statements of ti'ie witnesses were recorded under Sectio^ 161 of tfte€ode and after comptetlon of investigcrfrion/ diar^e sheet ^OTS Chief Judicia! Magistrote, Bilaspur, w^io in tum 'cxrtw^^''^^a3aes^^'^t^ Court* of Sessfons, Bilaspur, from ^@re the Additional Sess^^^ Bilaspur received the case on trons<fer for Irkil, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ 5. In order to prove the 9Uilt of 1+ie accused/a^elkant, the prosecution has e5«tminedas mony as 8 witnes^s. Statement ef -the acaji^Bd/o^pslkint WGB •^w- ;t. also recorded under Section 3t3 of 1+ie Code whershs^erile^ Bth® -^;;..,--;<^.^ •-••^..^.^^ m. circumstonces appearing ogainst him and plearied innoGO^^^^^^ impliaxtion in the crsme in question, ® ••^•^^^^^^ 6. After affording opportunJty of heoring to the pwties ^c AdditJoridtl Sessions Judg® has conyicted and sentenced^^^^ l^ aforemerstioned."- "•, - -:: '- ^ :; •• • ~:::': — • -•••-• .^•••-^^^^^^^ ::/': •:' 7. We hay®heard learned counsel for Ihe parties, peruaed th®Judjgwiitt impugned <md rccord of Itie Court below. ^ •^K:: 8. Lsarned counse! for the appetlcmt yehementty arguad that in^^^^ evidence of eyewltnesses Vinod Kumar Sahu yW-S)<and%a3e^wa^^WWS^, the eyidence of <&orelal (PW-1) •whom ^^-dffQea^^^^^^s^^ ^^^.- -:;•^^^•^^•y^^^:^ ..^- declarction, dehati nalis^ii (ExP/7) and statement of the deceasad recordad under Section 16t of the Code Ex.P/14 and the evident^ of invettigeting officer A.SPQikra 0>W-6), the pre^irt- appelleint is no* diaputing the inciclent and causing injury to the dec^a^acl^ btit 1liie cppetiGi^^^^^^te his cowiction under Section 302 of the Indian Ptenal (^de. UQ^ned eoynsBl further argued ^iat 1+ie eviden€^ of 1+ie Drosecutsan witrmsse^ cl :-..,F;^;,,;..;a^;-.^-^:^t-^ reveal Itiat at the time of incident, the ^peJlciritwo^oOTWwm^^^^ he was in drunken condition and after some alterartien, he sl^^^f^ the deceased ^niows that he has not Jntenttonally cc^sed^de^ decea^d, therefore, eyen if 1+ie evidence adduoed onfeehalf of^^^^t^ prosecution isadmitted in rt^ f<3^e vali^, then ^e act^^ not travel bgyond 1+»e scope of Section 304 (^t II of^^I^ Code. Lewned coun^l contended thoct 1+»e appatlant is in €ust®d^jaiioe 23.7.2001 and has completed rpore 1+ian8 years. ; a 9- On the other hond, learned Stcrte coyn^al supported •tte judgment inyiuyied and wgued that at Ifie t?me of Jncicterrt, the at|^ll<3^^^^^c but was not in drunken condjtion. H®himsetf hos oaUed th®dteceassddnel w^en th& deceased axme. •ttien he shot fired fromvet^closedistanc«over dbdomen of the dee^a^ad shows -riiat he hc^ CGIJ^^ €u||abl^1^^ d^ith of ctec^a^d Santoshkumar amountjng to murder c^ ^e^yi^t b@l@w has rightly convlcted the appellcsnt ynder Seetion ^@ of^^t^ Code cmd Section 27 (1) of the Arms Act. 10. In order to appreclate the arguments Gdy<masd on behcdf of the j»arties^we haye exarpined the evlctenceaddvced on behalf of 1+ie pr^se^l^ pnssent case, hotnkiidal <teath as a r^sult of W^^^^^ Ssanto^kumcr has not be«n substanttelly di^tedby ^e^pell^, E^ oliier hoBid. a!so estoblished by the evic!8nc& of |>rl.^.MaelhN)Wt ^^|^, medical report ExP/8A, &r.N.S.Ch<nidel (PW^ <md wt@^ 1^0^^ which reveals that cause of decrth was shock ss a result of tMiJM- liju found oyer vilal part of body of ths <teceased <md deal^wwas^^ nature. ' . - .:.-..:--:. ..• ...•.:... •^•: •,.•-'.^ ":..^:'.'?'':^li 11. As regards the complicity of 'tfie accysecl/ap^tlGnt in the crime $nj^ the convicfrion is based on the evidence of eyw^tnesses ^inodsl&AmfflP ^ohd .^-^^•^^•^:f::K.,^^^^ (PW-2), Rawkumar (PW-5), ord dying deciar^im made by ^ before Sorelal (PW-l), written dying dector^ion/dyiRg deelo^^ 1he investigatms offic«rA.SPaikra ^W-6) as dehati rwlBshi 6xJy7«md ? ..--^.-.^.^^•^tll^-f ••./.fe:::- stateinent recorded under Section 161 of the Cocte cs &(fcJP/14^ W -!^:^..;;....-IAtife..:^--^ Sohu yW-2) has dteposed in his evsdence l+scrt- icrt ^ appellant was stcsnding before his rcrtiori ^opr^ 1h^^^^ was coming towards his ^iop COTCI some dt»rcfldHor^t<^^lac®Be-hweim the^ q?pellQnt ond the deceased; then the oppetlary^ fsi%d upon 1|w A^^ his abdomen by country-niocte Distol emd fled towar^s Mi@^t^^^ :-'^'.:.,,.:;».:^'^^.:..^\^ Pa<riii ond Kflunkunmr Kumri chased him, SmtoAkuBiar fiAso tt¥ie<A;*^ rcn towards his ^iop and on Itie <%cond day, SaOTtoshkunwy^ledr^^^ j has deposed sn his evidence thot at l^ie tim^ofNii€i<ABrrl,1ilte^^^^^^^^^^^ '>..;'::>^::."::':^^t^-;'t^::'' - appellarst wxs standing befow betel shop of Vin^ e^d W^CQ^ 1+i®decea%d was coming towards his shop w^om thftflppe^*?^!^ after sows altercart'ion, 1+ie appellant took <»uthte eounlvy^ fired upon deceased SontoshkumQr, Santo^skumor tried toi^^^ house and 1+ie GDDellant fled towordhs Mcvstyrl Me alo?iq Nl+i^ Sotty <riiflidte4 :11.-.'.'-;^.^^^^^ the oppellont ond on the second doy, Santosl^HWP ^wsd. |^ cross-examined bol+i 1+ie witrressas <rt- leaTgl+i, but has 11^ b^t^te^^^ any-thiiig <n th®"'cross-exawinattons to discredit ^eir tesllmony^^CKilt^ relating to the fact that -they haye not seen ^e iriciderrt'^d^^»|(^t|ar ^: ^,^^ has not fired upon the d^se^i^d. t2.©orelal(PW-1) has also deposed in his evidencethat he ji^ur-til sound, Irticn he sois lliat injured Scintoshjwiniar wss running towar^^ holding his abdomenand blood v^oovmQfyem"^^ ^^ Santoshkumar told him •riiat appellont Sanjoy^PQndey hes fii*|d d|offi^imb)f country-made pistol, at that time/ th® c^^tiairt^^ ^ country-made pistol He also osked the appetlarit^a* why^A^^^ •then he told that on eccount of previous enmity, ha haaftre^^ ^ injured Santoshkumar to ho^ital where f^a!|y h@ diedct S^o^^&<^ ..^... has cross-exawned this witness at length. In his detail crpssi-extmirHBtion, he has denled the su§gestion in pcra 17 tha^the cteoeasc^ l^ iio^s^^ dying declaration to him- l^ has also <^ied-the suiggastiwi^^^^^t^^ been -folsely implscwted the appellant on 1^@ account of^p tnmtty. Inyestigoting offscer A.S^ikra CPW-6) has ^edficatly deposed 1+isrfs h®l has recorded dehoti nolishi of jnjured Santoshkumar at hespital y^de 6x.P/7. He has also recorded hss statement under Section 161 of •rtiie <S&de at hospital yide Ex.P/14. After dea-rti of deceased SeOTtbshkumar, bo-th llie documents become wrstten dying declaratjon in y^iich h- jsclearjy nientioned that the Gypellant has assaulted him by couirt-ry-rp^e plstd^^ ^ fatal injuries, 13.The evidences of Vinod Kumar Sahu (PW-2), RQmkiwnar (PW-S), <5orelal (PW-1) and inyestigatjng offjcar- A.S.Paikra (PW-6) inspir®confidenGe and trustworl+iy. The evidences of Vinod fcjitnar So^y CPW-2)jmd ^ 0>\4/-S) have been corroborated by dehati rmlishi B<J^^ slttte^!^^ decaased Ex.P/14 recorded by A.SJ^iikrG ^>W-6) orad oral dy^ dedleu^tion mcid®by the deceased 1o ^orelal ^W-f). Thes®eyldences are suffici©Tt for drawing inference 1+iGt Itie <ypell<mt ^^ 1tie persory ^ bullet jrsjury by counlry-made pistol to th@de<seased <md as areajlt of^^ injury, the deceased died. 14.As regardsth®question of motiye is c(mosvnsd, iroth®ppesent caaB, oiccording to the evidence of ftamto.imcr 0>W-^ the Qp^t|an1|w^ coiistr^ liquor, but he was not m drunken condH-ion. ^e^ ^^e^e^^^^^^^^ deceased, thcn he called hw catd after some altBrcationf he to@l< out ^^..^^..^,^,.^^^^ country-made pistol c&nd shot fireduponltiede^aased^ic^ any w^ipon. These cjrcumstances cl<Mirty ^ow thffl" ,1+ie <^pd(<^ cau%d and fired by countr^-rrusde pistol frosri ^Stx^^^ intant to causing his death <yid hc svitceedlng in c^using his death, IS.After appreciating tiie ®viden<% availdble en record, leer^ Sessions Judge has conyicted thecypellairt- uri^p S^ion 30S trf^eind^ Ptenal Code and ^ntenced him to unctergo jm^ris^ment^fopti^ T yse of fire arm under SecNon 27 (t) of l+ie Arms Act-for whfch nD ;.,^:,^:.;"-..^-^;-';.,^;,: sanction under Section 39 of the Arms Act WM f^a^sary^'Qteng wtb other •m-.^ • •:".' ^ ^ntence <md fine. The conviction of ^e csw^ltot ^ b^edl cm^^^ ...,,.^^;,.-,t.:,^,^,--^ clinching and credibleevidence sustaunodble taider^the lo^^^T^ has not conimitted <my itlegality in conytcting and %nt%ncsr?^ Ih^ €^ell<3!tt. j 16-0n cloiSte ^rutiny of the evidence, we do not find any ^substwias in the '<,.—.,—.,,;..--;. .r"- "5 ,w" '.<;^^"''.^"-w;:.''w;,g.," w.i appeal. 'Hie xipj^al being deyoid of mertt is Ikible to be dlsmfcssedGftcl is accordingly dismissed- ——^— Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge B/-