WW,WI§,W cwA: 562(h9/ mm 111 200 WW (WW) (now MW,W,W W m a 200 WW (WW) . WMxifgam aa$§r§$% gw‘wm ammm causing dea‘rh of Hidme (for shorf “fhe IP63 sen'renced him 1-0 undergo imprisonmem' for life and 1'0 pay fine of RsJDOO/a. in defauH of paymen? of fine 10 further undergo RI. r one year. Howaver; learned Second AddiTional Sessions Judge acqu d fhe accused from The charge under Sec’rion 307 of We IPC. 2) Case of ‘rhe prosecution, in brief, is fhaton 19—9-1997 of abou‘l‘ 3.00 p.m. Hidme (since deceased); m her of Quddi; came 1'0 The house of ihe accused and asked him as i’o why e has macked her son Guddi. She fhrew fhe house hold arficies ou‘l' of 1 house of 'ihe accused. Thereafter she sfari'ed removing The ear-Then T ies of fhe roof. In ‘i'he meeni'ime, ihe accused crri'acked The deceased w fh a wooden leg of fhe co‘i' on fhe head of Hidme and on fhe nexf day she di d on account of injuries. The mafi'er was reported by Madkami Lakhma ( 1) in Police Sfa‘iion Tongpai. Based on fhai' Firs‘i' Informai'ion Report ( /1) was regis‘i’ered. 3) Affer registering The cri fhe Invesfiga‘iing Officer ieff for fhe scene of occurrence. Affer g ng nofice 1'0 fhe Panchas; he prepared inques‘l' (EXP/3) on fhe body of dme. Towel of Guddi was seized under ExP/z Biood s'i'ained soil «34 plain soil was seized from The place of' occurrence under EXP/4. Accus d gave memorandum under EXP/5 and in pursuance of ‘i'haf fhe axe was sei ed under Ex.P/6. Wooden leg of fhe cof was seized under EXP/7. Injurie of Guddi were examined by Dr. MK Joshi o i e ' P - E P i i .. i ‘x WW, m,W (PW-5). He prepared injury repo EXP/8. The body of Hidme was sent for- pos‘rmor‘rem examina'rion under E .P/12 #0 Primary Hearth Cen‘rer; Chhindgar where Dr. D.K. Kisan (PW-8) con of death was due 1'0 head injury bone of skuiL as a resuh' of injuri Pas‘rmor‘1'em reporT is EXP/17. 4) Affer' complefion of invest of Judiciai Magis‘i'ro‘re; Fir-sf Cia. 1’0 The Cour-f of Sessions Judge, Sessions Judge; Jagdalpuri received ihe same on Transfer for Triai. 5) In order f0 esfabiish 'i'he prosecu‘i'ion examined 8 wifnesse recorded under Sec‘i'ion 313 of ‘i aypearing against him. He stare implicafed in The crime. 6) Learned 3ecood AddiTiona The respecTive parties, convicTec commission of offence under Secii'ion 30? of The IPC. However; he acquiTTed The accused/appellanT for commission of offence under secTion 307 of The IPC as aforemenTioned‘ uc‘ied posfmor'fem and opined Thai cause i and fracfure of frontal d: righf parietai as No.1 & 2. Dea‘rh was homicide! in na‘fur'e. gafion; charge sheei‘ was fiied in The Courf is; Sukma who in furn commi'i'fed fhe case Jagdaipur, from where Second Addi‘rionai charge againsT The accused/appeiianT'The s. STaTemenT of The accused/appellanT was he Cr.P.C. in which he denied The material i ThaT he is innocenT and has been falsely Sessions Judge afTer hearing counsel for I and senTenced The accused/appellanT for W W Hi 200 Wm (W) WWW Wmifzétm agaimm m m “i 200 mm (Wis!) am§$ WWW WWWifgém §7ai1=cm3né¥1 7) We have heard Shri IWand Kumar Gupfa'. learned counsei for fhe appeilan‘f and Shri D.K. Gwalr- Sfa‘re. 8) Af 1'he Voufsef, learned co sel for ‘l'he accused/appellam’ submi‘H'ed fha‘r This case comes under SecT 304 Parf-II of fhe IPC; as fhe deceased herself wen‘r 1'0 The house of 1' e accusedi sfar'fed quarreHing wi‘rh him; sfar‘i'ed removing The earfhen Ti of roof of his house and sfarfed pel‘ting sfones on ‘rhe accused‘ which enr ged The accused Thaf is why he macked her wifh a wooden leg of co‘r in order To protect himself. There was no infen‘i'ion of The accused 1'0 cause ea1’h of Hidme. 9) On The, o1'her hand; learn judgment of ‘l'he Trial Court 10) As far as homicidal dea‘l‘ of Hidme is concernedl Dr. D.K. Kisan of Hidme and found 1he following Juries l: 1n i . > Incised wound n righ‘f side of forehead in fhe size of 2" x 1" > Incised wound n righ‘r pariefal region in 1he size of 1" x e" x mW,W,W e; learned Addl, Public Prosecufor for fhe ' frac‘rure of fro fai & parie1ai bone. i l WW,W,W Wm in 200 Wm (W) mamma- WWW WWW %Q°!W mmm éaawmanéw Injuries were caused by hard & blun1‘ object Deafh was homicida! in na‘rur'e. Moreover; PW-3 50mm has surfed ‘rha‘r The accused a‘H'acked deceased Hidme wi‘rh a wooden Ieg of cof on fhe head; as a resuh' of which blood sfarfed oozing ou1' of The injury. Hidme wen? 1'0 The house of The accused f0 enquire as 1'0 why he has affacked her son 6uddi and on fha‘l‘ account 1'he accused’a‘Hacked The deceased. 11) Moreover; PW-4 Madkarri Kesa has sfafed Thaf Panchaya'i' was convened in respec‘r of dea‘fh Hidme in which The accused made exfm judicial confession Tha‘r he a1'1' cked Guddi and his mofher' (Hidme) on accoun‘r of anger; as Hidme ame To his house & sTarTed enquiring. Therefore; in view of The above vidence of eyewiTness Le. PW~3 Somdu and The exTm judicial confession mad before PW-4 Madkami Kesa; compiiciTy of The accused in The crime in quesTi n is established. 12) As regards inTenTion, as p r The prosecuTion case; in fact in The first insTance accused aTTacked Guudi son of, The deceased, wiTh an axe. When Hidme (since deceased) came To now abouT The facT‘ she wenT To The house of The accused, sTar'Ted quarreli ng, sTarTed pelTing sTones on The accused and sTarTed removmg The earThe Tiles of The roof When she did noT sTop The accused became angdymcke up a wooden leg of The coT and aTTacked The deceased. In The firsT msTa e‘ Hldme herself wenT To The house of The accused where she sTarTed pelTi g sTones, up To Thar Time The accused had o HW,WW,W Wm In 200 Wm 0mm!) WWW mmifzéw évaifcmm no? indulged in any mar peat Th reaf‘rer; Hidme s‘l’m'fed removing ear‘l'hen files of 'I'he roof; seeing all fhes ac‘rivi‘ries of The deceased The accused became angry, picked up a wo leg of The cof and affacked on fhe deceased wifh ‘i'ha‘l'. The above .acfs are suggestive fha‘h in fact when Hidme wenf io ‘rhe house of fhe a cused; sfar‘red quarreiiing; pei‘l'ing sfones and removing The ear‘i'hen Tiles of oofi fhe accused in a hea‘r of passion and in a sudden quarrel; wi‘l’hou'r any p medi‘i'a'rion and preparation affacked the deceased wi‘i'h a wooden Ieg of Th coT. Therefore; The case of The accused squareiy covered under excepTion 4 of SecTion 300 of The IPC. There is noThing on record; which shows Th T The accused aTTacked The deceased wiTh an inTenTion cause deaTh of Hidm 13) For The foregoing reaso convicTion imposed upon The accused/ appeiianT under SecTion 302 of T e IPC cannoT be susTained, consequenTiy, senTence imposed upon him under ha‘i‘ counT also cannoT be sustained. 14) In The resuiT, The appeal p rTly succeeds. The convicTion & senTence under 'SecTion 3G2 of The IPC are‘seT d under SecTion 304 ParT—II of The IPC and senTenced To undergo RI. fo 10 years. IT is si’aTed ThaT The accused/ imposed upon The accused/appel aside; insTead Thereof he is conv o n e n .. e i i appellanT is in deTenTion since 22- 4997,. Thereby he has already compIeTed The senTence imposed upon him. herefore; he be seT aT liberTy farThwiTh; if noT requi§d in any oTher case. Sdl- :7:;:A,g Sd/_ L.C.BHADOO ' T.’P Sharma Judge Judge