3T:??f?i11^-11'* ''•eiT ?[R?f ^iiiR; ^SSf ^|<|l(rtA|, cilTTl'H'Ko; Ri^ltfy ^.:.f{-.....^^..G, •<w ( ^giwdfta BI^T APPELLANT: ^i|'Lt[ci41T1 'W^i ^f ftT3t' <^(-^R •^affirasn^i Hariram @ Bhothana, S/o Kartik Ram Dhanuhar, Aged about 42 years, R;'o Village Lamer Boirhapara, Police Station Kota, Distt.Biiaspur(C.G.) i.1n Jaiii - \ ersus - RESPONDENT: State of Chhattisgarh. Through the Superintendent, Centra! Jail, Biiaspur (C.G.) Present: Mr. Ak'nil Agarwai, counsei for the Mr. D.K. Gwalre, Additional Pubiic ippellant. Prosecutor for the State/resoondent. iivjsiorLBench: Hon'bie Mr. LiC. Bhadoo and Hon'bleMr. L.C. BHADOO. J. ijrendra Mishra, <JJ. (belivered oiji 23rd Aprii, 2007) This appeai is directed against |he judgment of conviction and order of senience daied 15 March, 2001 passed by the Sessions Judge, Biiaspur in Sessions Trial N0t224/2000, whereby learned Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellant guiity Tor commtesion o* offence under Sectjon 302 ofithe i.P.C., sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for !ifs s.nd pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in defauit of payment offineto further underao R.l. for six months. —W.— !' -jl^fL!";. XI-HC—78 3^ET ^WWi{, »Tlly'l(S, Rj^l^y / ^ /^G.,,A.s^o sn^T ira^ ( II?I?-I<!|({ET) sn^r ^i fq-ii'ti -=TSTT S^^ ?bHr°ii ^RnwHfeTsn^sT cbl^'^'1 +1H(nl '^^f^Sf •(.FIR^R ^i'sfRraan^T thdt rarti 2. Case of the prosecution is t? Amar Singh & accussd Hari Hariram, aii of them collecteli liquor. Hariram brought !iquot Saliram (since deceased) agai accused Hariram became but Baliram sgain insisted and] Deceased Baiiram slapped abusing Baliram. Teejram, Shf' separated them. In the mean from hfe house, stopped Balir^t assaulting him, on whlch Teej arrow at Baiiram vvhich pierce|d disd Instantaneously. Teejrar|i angry ria the chest of Baliram. but he fai on 13-4-2000, Teejram, Shiv Prasad, were sitting near the house of accused Rs.40/- and asked Hariram to bring ^ which was consumed by all of •ihem. ^. asked Hariram to bring liquor o" whlch and said that he is not their seroant, in that process they started quarre.'Hng. iriram once on which Hariram sta'tsd pv Prasad & Amar Sing'n intervened and Itime, the accused brought bow & arrow Im and said that v/here he is going after |ram & Baliram stopped. l-1ariram sbot into his chest. Batiram feil down and ettempted to take out the arrovi.' from !ed in his attempt. 3. The matter ws.s reported in P^lice Station: Kota by Teejram (PVi/-3) at about 3.30 p.m. on which th^ F.1.R. (Ex.P-3) v/as registered. Merg intimation Ex.P-4 was aiso giv^n by Teejram. The Investigating Officer seized the iron arrow from T^ejram which 'A'as snatahed by him from accused Hariram. He !eft fon the scene of occurrsnce and prepared the Inquest (Ex.P-7) on the body of Baiiram. Body of Baliram v/as sent for post-mortsm examinatioh to Community Healt'n Centre, Kota, where Dr. S.K. Shrivastava (PW-7) conducted post-mortem on 14-4- 2000 and noticed that the'arrow was pisrced Into the chest near 7 rib, the woundwas in the slze of 1" x %" x Vi' which damaged the liver, as a result of the injury, tiver was ruptured and the doctor opined that the E-HC—78 3n^?r ?>i h-i' '^SS\ 3TI^?T ?^^i<^ <!-OTI ";<l'ill(?''<<, SiTfl+f'lfi, Rl^iy^ G^. ^-^60, S^f 1I31W (' TOiiwaregsii^r 'l'wfciifl-l -Wraf ivfvS {hWi i73?Rn3iI^T cause of death was shock Investigating Officer prepared soil and biood stained soil und^ 'hs accused was arrested an<il as a rasult of haemorrhaae. The fhe site plan Ex.P-11 . Ke ssized piain w Ex.P-12 from the place of occurrence. at his instance, bow was seized under Fv D-1 A .P-14. Chief Judiciai Magistrate, Bilas the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur| witnesses in order fo establishl of the accused was recorded i| 4. After compietion of investigaticln, charge sheet v/as filed in the Court >pur, who in turn committed the case to where the prosecution examined nine charge against the accused. Statement nder section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the materia! app^aring against him in the prosecution evidence and stated that he isjinnocsnt, he has been falsely implicated in the crime. 5. Learned Sessions Judgs afte convicted and sentenced the hearing counse! for respective parties, ccused as aforementioned. 6. We have heard Mr. Akhi! Ag&rwai, learned counsei for the appsllant and Mr. D.K. Gwaire, learned ^dditiona! Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State/respondent. | 1 7. Mr. Akhil Agarwa! has not djsputed the homicidai death of Baliram. iVoreover, in view of the ocU!ar evidence of Teejram (PW-3), Shjv Prasad (PW-4) & Amar Singh (PW-5) and the msdicai evjdence of Dr. S.K. Shrivastava (PW-7) vvho has stated that he conducted post- mortem on the body of Ballram on 14-4-2000 and the death of Baiiram -;a-HC—78 3^c[ ^i<<i0A), ®TTly'i<s,Kirtiyy &,. ^.s^Oj 5H^7 q?j [q'lt^ 'ci^'T S^^[ 5h^)<^ an^?r ^sw (ipf^gw^ 'reiTWttosn^i was homicida! in nature as ^ established that the death of Bbliram 8. As far as invoivement of the ac|cused/appe])ant in the crime in question is concerned, Teejram (PW-; (PW-5) are the witnesses whcj time of commlssion of crimel said that he is not their servan slapped the accussd and in thj arrow and shot arrow at the| pierced into the chest andl Defence has not been ab'e examination of these three wi <*i|'4i^1tfl1 TTT?^T '^,.t^T^t <f^1<^R i?aifOT3tl^r resuit of shock & haemorrhage, it is vvas homicidal in nature. .), Shiv Prasad (PW-4) & Amar Singh were at the place of occurrence at the and consumed 'iquor aiong with the deceased and the accused. Afl the three witnesses 'nave categorlcaliy stated that they coiiected F^s.40/-, then Baliram asked accused brought liquor, thereafter, ai'l of them Hariram to bring iiquor, he consumed the same. Ther4after, deceased Baliram again asked accussd Hariram to bring ilquitsr on which Hariram became angry and t, he wil! not bring llquor. The deceased iat process, the accused brought bow & deceased \vhich hit on his chest and the deceased died instantaneousiy. to bring anything on record in cross- itnesses, which makes the evidence of these witnesses unreliable or ilsntrustworthy. Therefore, invoivement o' the accused in the crime in fluestion has been estabiished and the same is based on legal, c'inchjng and ocular evidence. 9. Mr. Akhl! Agarwa! argued that |the accused attacked the dsceased in s sudden fight on the spur of ths moment without preparation and premeciitation in a 'neat of passion, therefore, he is entitied for Exception 4 to Secfion 300 of the i.P.C. ^ •-~"T°IEB! »an*lm' ier's, Opp. High Court, Bilaspur ® 22206,29336 \ £ I-BC—78 SII^T ?il Ri'114 ?W OTCT WRR7 3^' •^m'ftii, tsr!\v<6, pjrti^y .&..,..A...3.<S4-^ »o( XRR; ( 's^ira't'(ri?!i aiiiw 10.0n the other hand, Mr. Gwal Court. •^Mh^tWraf 'il..fe3t <^<^! ^afRpT 3ii^i e supported the judgment of the trial 11. !n order to appreciate the we have scrutinized the evil prosecution case. Evidence ^i effeci that ali these persons asked the accused to bringl consumed 'oy alt of them, Hariram (accused) to bring liquf: and said that he !s not theiri Hariram w'nich enraged Hariran| & arrow, shot arrow at Baliram the chest, even ruptured the lev| argtiment thenafter iqupr '.Therefore, from the above fgctsl . e\ff(itsej»^w^ in which first the aseueed slapp' clreumstances, it is establishei heat of oassion in a sudden advanced by Mr. Akhil Agarwal, pence of the eyewitnesses and the j)f t'ne prosecution v/rtnesses is to the |n the first instance coiiected Rs.40/-, iquor which he brought, that was again, Baliram (deceased) askec! on which the accused became angry' servant, whereupon Baiiram slapped >|i. Hariram al! of a sudden brought bow |which hit on his chest and piereed into ?ter and Baiiram died instantaneouslv. f, it is established that.there was quarre' ^ Bt e. ej^^^ U ted the 'dcssoasQd and the accused all of a sudden brought arrow and sfiot at the deceased. From the abov that the offence was committed in a quarre! without any preparation and premeditation, as such, the ^ccused is entitled for the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 of thp I.P.C. 1 13.1n the result, conviction and sentences imposed upon the accused/ appeiiant under Section 302; of the i.P.C. cannot be sustained, therefore, conviction and sentences imposed upon him are set aside, he is acquitted of the said charge, instead thereof, he is convlcted under Section 304 Part-11 of the l.P.C. and sentenced So undergo R.l. aity^'-1""' XI-8C—78 TCTT •^ww'^, fs^wis, ^v'iwy. C^. ft.^so/ sntff ?n K;-ii<* ^TSiTT 3^I^T;hHiqi Soma sn^f ^RRR ( T^nw^ifer sii^t sentence. The accused be set d other case. _c^—--------- Sdl- L.C.BHADOO Judge ^I^IW^I ^W^' '^,1^3t <i^1^.R ^sffgTian^r for seven years. it is stated th^ the accused is in detention since 15- 4-2000, thereby he has alreacjy completed seven years of the jail t liberty forthwith, if not required in any Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge