y-7 \ KII-189/(Jail) C.J.P.R. 11/94/2,000 CF0000059935 } f ^\fc^ @ APPEAL OF PR1SONER No............. ^^2...................... Name.......^v^^;^^wfet00.6^.^Jin!^.l...... !lTme"A^'"'"^^''"''t"'''<;J'"'~'"'"' Res,dence^.-^^....:.::.:;A8C'........t<°....^....^..^......- .....:.- Sent.nced to ..^^.-..^^^..... On......-^...»~/.fc........... ......... Under section ..^0^...^^.^...^'... by ^-^^^F^^^-^^^ It is explained to the prisoner that ifhe states or wishes to be represented by legal ^practitioDerthe Appellate Court willnotproceedwiththe base for seven days unless fhe legal practitioner appears . If the legal practitioner does not appear within seven days he may not hear.d at all . Ifihe prisoner states that he does not wish to be repre" sented by legal practitioner the court may proceed at once with the case and will nct be obliged to give a hearing to any legal practitioDer who should appear , I 2 3 4 Date ofApplicationforcopy ofJudgement ... ^. ^^.^^^^- Date on which copyreceived ............... ...... IL(.(...^/..<^.^.. ............. . ......... Date on which Appeal seot........... .. .........lL)...i.^./..5p/^.. ...................... Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented or not - Yes / No No.... .....&$^. .........^.^..^.........,.. Na«e..^..^^....^.^^...... Gonfined in ...... ........ .^.\}]J>:........... 3a.il.....^..Qj^^Qnll^^ No.......^..J13^...............Dated,...i.^^... 199.^......... ..........^..^ ! ''. ! '' , "'"-'/ ^._. .. f\.. - ° J\._.' Forwarded to the CHIEP JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ^.^.t.^.. . ^:nA^.q?. ^-^<^^< ( '^ ".^ '^ togather which a copy ofjudgement or order passed in the case for favoiir of trans- C/^hission to the properAppellate Court. Sujperiot^iitot „ r ^^^Foc'6> • »^^-"" M^f^l'iiS^ ..~^'" -\ L Date of receipt in... ........ ...-.........;.. ofTice .....................L.......^<41J Date of receipt record to accompany the "{•^^^iji-Ma^^Sfie-A- Memo ofAppeal to ihe Appellate court .»»AaAI-PUK. No Dated .....i.........&..yl99... Fotwarded to the ........;. ... . ..............I ^f&J^ ^"^^^Bt ^i1 •••^^.^.^^^A Date ofreceipt in Appellate Court ;«lt^. ( P. T. O.-t) XI-HC-22 ^^ ^WM^, ^Ti1^^<o, T®j<ni^li< S^^ xra^ ^c-r.\^pp.\.^:..(.&su ^l^^l 9h^|ch " , 'i^^ST" •® 200 ^s^r^r f<rli<=h 3T1^T 5fri^ich ^f^a 3^r'^n^R'^ft?r cM$lf<ri<flrl 'RPq'^f ^ ft^ <p3l^l< ^ 3?if^PT ^TT^T DivisiiasaL-BeaaLeh: - Hos&^fele Mr. L.C. Bi&adoo asad Ho32*fo2e Mr. DSaireadra Mislara, J 9-3-2006 Mrs. Kiraa Jaia, counsel for Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Additional Bhatia, Panel La^rer for fhe State, Oral judgment dictated ou L u. the appellaat. PubUc Pro^ecutor with Mr, M.P.S. 'respQiident la?s, PCT L.C, Bbado^s__Jl_- By fhis appeal under Secti^ appeUant Punaram has questione<p. judgBient of convictiou aiid order passecl by the Aclditional Session^ Trial No. 298/94, whereby lcai-nc|; holdmg tlie accused/appellaat gu^lty Section 302 of tlie I, P, C, , sentenc4 liie siid tb pay a lm.e of Rs, 1,0001 ftirtherTindergoR.I. for three nioi3| The ca^e of tlic prosecuti^ accused Punarain himsetf gave t|l police statton Tumgaon to the ef^ Bai used to go frequeixtly to hesj went to her liiatemal place aii4 thcrcfore, thev went there aad brd to his ia-laws place i.e. Viilage ^ »n 374 (2) oftlie Cr.P.C. accused/ the legality and coiTectness ofthe 3f seutenee dated 3rd August, 1996, Judge, Mahasamund, in Sessious d Adclitional Ses'^ioiis Judge after for coiimiission of oflfeiice under d hini to unclergo iBiprisoiiraerit for / -, in deiault of payment of fine to tlis. •n, iii brief. is diat 0x1 28,3,1994 le inerg intimatk>u (Ex.P-5) ni the ;ct that 1-iis daughter-in-law Saiitra niatenisl place and last year she did not retum for two laonths, ught her back. Thcreaftcr, he went chola to eam his Uveliiiood, where [Tit^'^fe^r XI-HC-22 '5^[r^i^j<n^, ^Tit^^Ko, f®«ni^^< ^.. 3Ti^r xra^r 'STT^T'^T r<rl[<=h 31T^T 5t)^i<=h <if^a wff^T^i^ra?""""""""**"**'"*****"*****^^ 200 •fq^8T------- ^T^T '^?TTW^Tf^T bn4gmg -%.r the father of liis daughter-iii-la^ was prepai'ed but same was no1 felt insultcd, Ou thc fateful dav, Chowkbeda to brrng utensUs afteniooii he took his daughter- Limhakiim' ou tlie pretext of Bai with pickaxe 2-3 tiines aiid tlie wcapon of offence pickaxe F.I. R. (Ex. P-6) was registered b| Chouhaii (PW-7) for commissior| 302 ofUie I.P.C. and took up tl of occurreiice. at the instance Bai was located aiid takeu p^epared the Pauchnama (Ex.P|" Weapon ofoffenceie. pickaxe a^ nito possession under Ex, P-4, where tlie bodv of Santra Bai v^ Santra Bai was sent for Hospital, Matiasamund zmder E| 11) couducted tlie postmorte^i prepared ttie postmLortesn x'ep4 articles were sent for chemiict Laboraton/, Raipur froBi wherc| ofSerologist has x'eceived. ctii^fd^i'i 'HPT^f'? f^st <pii^i< '^3rf^3TT^[ c£U2ie aiid cn that dav a dish of JGi^h (given to him for eatuig, on which he |ic sent his sou Rcsfakiiinar to viilage wfaicli were pledged axid m the {m-law Santra Bai witb. litoi towaixls [ wood, There he attacked Santra jcoiiiBiitted her inurder, He produced ^lso.-Based on this inerg HitLDiation, ^r the Investigatmg Officer Shri R.L. of Qffence pmiishable luider Sectiou |ie iriyesugation, He weut to the place >f aocused, the dead body of Santra ^B.to. pQSsession under Ex,P-2 aa^d 1) of the dead bodv of Saiiti-a Bai. id clothes ofaccused were also taJcen Site Plan (Ex,P-7) of the place from \Q.Q recovered was prepared, Body of exainiaation to Govemjnent C.P-8A, where Dr. N.K. Mandape (PW- on the body of Saiitra Bai aiid rt Ex, P-8. Recovered blood staiiied ^l exaniiiiation to ForeXiisic Science Ireport Ex.P-11 aloug with thereport post|norteBi [Tft^ ^fe^. XI-HC-22 '3^r ^I^M^ ^TTI^^KO, [®«ni^y sni^r x^? 'BTI^T'^T f<-li<=b ^STT^T 5^^i<=h ^[^a -^ 'Wl^ITIR^N? ***"*""****' ****"^T^ ^^ .^^........................... ^n^T'^TT^R'Hf^T .-^- After comLpletion of io.vestig^tion, cliarge sheet was filed ui the Court of leai-aed Jiidicial Magistrjate,. First Class, Mahasamund, for coniinission of oSc-n.cc undcr Scc| Raipur from where leanied Adcliti< rcceived fhe case cn ttarisfer for trtial, The prosecution ia order t| accuscd exaioiD.ed as zsiauv as d CM^IQI^II ^TR^f'? ftl^t <F3l^l< '^^rf^R^n^i •tion 302 of the I.P.C. agaiast the accused, vvho m tuni committed ^he case to leanied Sessious Judge, )nal Sessioiis Judge, Maliasamund 3 establish the charge against Uie leven witnesses, Statcmeut of the accused was recorded imder Secljion 313 of fhe Cr.P.C. m whicfa he iappearing ^amsf liini aiid stated falsely ioiplicated in. tlie crime, deniecl the prosecution evidence that he 'is innocent ao.d has beeii Leamed Additional Session^ Judge after heariiig tlie argziments of Additional Pablic Prosccutot and couusel for thc accused, coiwicted & sentenced tlie accusl Bhatia, P, L, on behalf of the Statc Homicidal deatli of Sa&tra E As fai' as mvolvement of th 'd ia tlie mamier as meutioned ui Pai-a 1 ofthisjudgment. We have heard Mrs. Jaia, le^irued couusel for tbie appeliaiit and Mr, U,N,S. Deo, leamed Addition^l PubUc Prosecutor with Mx'. M,P,S, the xsiurder of Sautra Bai is cou^emed, there is no bcular or direct evidence iix this case^ tlie whok evidencc aiid as pcr sctUcd law, from tlie facts belbrc restia^ circumstaiitiai evidence that iy conclusion of gutlt i»to be dra.wn ^ respondeut, |ai is not m dispute, |e accused/appellaiit m committmg case rests on the circimistaiitial thc Cotirt is rcquired to ascertam. fhe conviction based on ttie e circumstauces from which the have not oiily to be fiiUy estabUshed [Tft^ ^i^^l. , XI-HC-22 ^n^T^T f<yii<=h snf^T 5h^i<=h ^f^a ^^r ^jqi^iq^ ^Tll^^Ko, f^<r11^^< 3ir^r x^ra? ^s^l^l sh^icb'*"<*****"**********'*<****"*****'^F^ 20° '^^ST'"" IT 'STT^T'^TT^fT'Hf^T -\- circuinstojAces circuinstatices but also that sill the conclu8ive nature and coiisistent of thc accused, Those explaisied by ao.y other hypothesi| the cham of the evidence m.ust reasonable ground for tlie foelief accused. It ueeds uo remiiider fij aud not niercly iadignation of| conviction aad tlie more serious care taken to scrutmi^e the evidel proof The prosecution has trie\ accused on fhc following circiiias 1. that, fhe body of decease| mstaiice of accused; ajid 2/ that, tiie weapon of offeri^ accusecl and tlie same was] First circuanstaBce: - As far as fliis ciil accused/appellaiit himself appe^ aad gave Uie inerg iritmiation (E^ things, has stated that the b<| agricultui^l field and hc can get| mtbi'mation, the Investigatmg \ lodged the rcport Ex, P-6, left recovered the bodv of Saatra Baj <=hl^(^1<flr1 'HFT^ff ^ f^Tst <f^^l< ^^rf^pT^^r I- so. e^tablished sliould be of a. only with fhe hypotliesis of the guilt shouid not be capable of beiag s except the guilt oftlie accused aad be so cQmplete as not to leave aiiy ;oxisistent witii the innoc^nce of the Lat legally established ciTouniQtauces thc court caa form the basis of the ci'ime, the greater should bc the tice lest suspicii^n takes the place of i to prove the criiae agaiiist tlie tances: - 1 Santra Bai was recovered at fhe t ;e, pickaxe wa^ recovercd from. tlie found stained witli huiaaa blood, mmstance is conceiTicd, tlie a-ed io. the PoMce Station Tunigaon s:, P-5) iu which he^ apart froni other dy of Santi'a Bai is lyiiig io. tlie tlie sanie rccovcred, Bascd ou this 3fficer Shn R.L. Chouhan (PW-7) for the scene of occurrcnce and under Ex,P-2 from. the agiicultural [Tit^"^fe^f XI-HC-22 -^ 3T^T'^T f^ri^^snt^T 5^^ich <rlf^a "5^ r^ll<41d^, ^>Ti1^^(o, f®i<ni^y 37i^r xra^? HW^t ^^.^.....—.—......—....—^^ 200 "'"'"^^T"" -.'(g) ^STT^T'^TT^R Trf^cT -<- field of Bukhau Saliu, PW-7 has>| Ex. P-6 aad at that time Dadhilj preseut, In Parass3 of evideuce, cbl^f<n<flrl 'RTRT^ff"? Fs^l <P»1^K iT'sri^R^yn^r stated ia his evidence fhat accused gave the niformation Ex. P-5 on ^vhich he registered tiie case iinder ^al (PW-2) & Narayan (PW-3) were Itliis witness has stated that at the mstance of fhe accused they ste|iled searchmg tlie body, fhereafter the body was recovered and saia^e was takeu iiito possession under Ex, P-2, which bears his siguatiijres and of fhe accused, Dadhibal, Narayaii/ Johaalal, Snresh & Sa4ti^ia< PW-1 Surcsh has stated that Paiiclianama (Ex. P-1) of the bod}]r was preparcd m his prcsence aiid body was also I'ecovered io. his rircsence under Ex,P-2, which bears his signature. PW-2 Dadhibal has also corroborated the above evidence aad stated that Ex.P-|[ & Ex,P~2 were prepared ni his < prcseiice, body was recovercd 41 his prescnce an.d thereafter, the same was sent tbr postmortem e^ coiTobot-ated tlie above evideuce, Therefore, froBi tlie afoove bodv of Saiitra Bai was re^ accuscd/ appeUaQ.t. Lcamed coiuisel for the acj body of Sasiti-a Bai was recoj reasous that the accused iminied t:aiamation. PW-3 Nai'avaa has also evidence it is e^tabllshed tha.t the ^overed at tiie instaace of the ^used/appellant argued that as the krcd from an agriculturai laiid, thercfore, recoven/ cannot be beli^ved, But, we do not find any s|uibstance iu fhis argujaient, for the iately, after conim.itting the criine, went to the Potlce Station Tumg^on aad disclosed that fh^ body is lymg m the agricuitui-al field of B|iikhau and the Investigatiug Ofiicer ioixnediately after registenag the 4^se left for the sceue ofoccurreuce [Tft^'^fe^r XI-HC-22 'S^T^T f^Tli<^ 3TI^T 5t)4-iicb <-if^a ^-^f ^Hid^ ^Ti1<y4i(o, (^<rii<Hy ^nt^r T^W HINC^iT ^^icb •^ 200 'fN^T' W^T ^RIT^R:-^f^ th^t the|m thfc aiid recavered tiie bQdy of Santr^i Therefore, it caiinot be said soisiebody clse aiid through the location of the bodv fhat fleld of Btikhau. Moreover, the under Section 8 of fhe Indian iafonnation regarding the plac^ lyiag aad the sainc was recoverc^l Seeond elrouaastsuaoes - Bai at fhe iiistaiice ofthe accused, bociv of Santra Bai was seen bv fhe accused camc to know about same was lymg m the agricultiiral t'onduct of the accused is admissible E|vidence Act as fh.e accused gave the of occurreiice where the body was at his nistaucc. WflO As far as tlds circumstan<j produced th.e weapou ofoffence mto possessiou under Ex. P-3 Invesugaring Officer (PW-7), apcused produced fhe pickaxe s^ aiid tlie saoie was talsen int|< Dadhibal has also stated ttiat possession on production by th^ his signature. PW-3 Narayaa h^ recovery of pickaxe froni the ac{ cstablished, The pickaxe in exammation to Forcnsic Scieut examiaed and as per FSL rep^ recovercd froin the possession o|i and raoreover, as per serologis4 humaii blood, <=t)l^I<n<fl'1 'HFT^ff ^ f^st <F3l<^l< '^'srf^FT^^T t- j::e i^ coiiceraed, fhe accused hiinself |n tfae PoUce Station, saine was taken |aiid Uiat has been proyed by the has stated ia his evidence that tamed with blood isi the poMce statiou jo pos^es^ioii under Ex.P"3, PW-2 [pickaxe m quesuon was taken mto accused under Ex. P-3, which beai's also proved fhis fact, Therc&re, fhe ^used, ou beiag procluced by hiin, is question was ^ent for chcxiiical ^e Laboraton^ Raipur where it was >rt Ex.P-11 fhe pickaxe, which was the acciised, was stained wifh blood report same was found stamed with .[Tit^itfe^ XI-HC-22 '3~aE[ '^TFTT^PT, ^•al^^Ko, fG!«ni1Mll< 3iTiOT XRT^ HW^\l 'gnTra?***'*****'"**'*""***************"'-^ 200 'fN^T""""""""""""""" 'STT^T'^T f^Tii<=b ^n^r 5h.^ich ^f^a ^TT^T'^TT^R ^Tf^T -n^ Iii view of the ibx'going stand proved agaiast fhe accus^^ Bai WQB recovcred at the iastaacb pickaxe was also recovered fron]| saiiie was found staiiied witli above evideuce it is established crmie io. question aad tliere is n^ in. question by ajiybody else. In tlie result, we do not judgment of trisl court, the api| liable to be disxxiissed and it is ad 4i^cussion, botli the circjjuii^taiice^ ^d/ appellaat, as tIiLC body of Saatra dp of accused, thc weapon of offence, the possession of flie accused aad jhumaii blood. Therelbre, fmm the [fhat fhe accused was the author of ^ possibility of comBiittmg the criaie ffco.^ Roshaii^ Sd/.- L.C. Bhadoo Judge % c=hi<4(<n<flvi H\H^\i ^ 'fe^ <p3i^i< '^'STf^HW^T m.d aiiy illegality or iniiiimnr m the ieal is devoid of aiiy merit/ same m cordin.gly, disxnissed, Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge -^ ^ ^ Y.? S1N ^ [Tit^'^fe^f