P 1: m4; p ¢§ L 42w3. ‘p. q :u i9 L. I u )sndpas (mxa ‘wuwv uo gzN a= Jo g‘awg gi uh. £i€{u“‘ig2s‘;u ’pimwg'a §; W“ :36-”, gamma am; H 5 aS‘QJd'bi L-- A” E., VE WGJJNL WE r... .... dd''v VNI n 2?c id W H N "smax "-iua2 a 9 w . v3 'd ¢ NH78Qa :¢ $WVHE‘TEFE”VMN L‘I‘’ 'Pi m3 ~1 u. H )U N. iii‘}i Wav "amt wgmnudp m /guwwaoLax. v u 5FOmu+ ‘ ; g; - . / 4, g;s >1M a m 'm aAa A9 3“ Case of ‘g‘fae presawt§am in briaf, is fha? the agapzlhnf, reai’ Brni’hw-M-inani of deceaszd B‘dmm came. 5'0 heusa 03" {\fzdmm. 0n 25.8.91 nf+er 1‘ king and .redmm were. sleeninoqin the same f' i winba: (PM? ”if ¥ m m? Dhm _,‘ ,- -f Eadmml ifhe by Sgada aver ks mack and rnv<pl4 fam! injuries4 Ezdmm died (gs a. resuh' 0f such imury. :faa agpaikmf fied fmm fha $9M (3n the sesmrj aim Kanmo (PW-é) ioégad +fne FER. Vida EXP/9. Mw‘g wnc recardzd Wig ExPiiQ EmlasfégQTEng Qfficzr grQceaded fer fhe scan? nf acaum;2:3c- and aft/:3" sum‘zzmgxing 'Tka Lv§?§1a5-gs Vida Ex.?!11, inques+ aver ‘ide. ExP/ hegd 59¢; 93‘ fhz was saw fer autopsy ire ?rimary Heaif%1’CanTrz, Marwahi virie Ex.P./3> Dr..R-madhar Glipf. (:9W—4) cepnductga gufgtrjsy vidg Px PM and found faiQaMno J in \Jiurias aver fha b’xriv nF +5m2. dece‘sed: -il wm ‘>3rm 13 E‘ 1:5n “bm6D. < . -v, ~. i) Heamgmma eve?- ?he ahesf and !ef‘r shou!dar,. .‘ ii) Ona inciSJj‘ weund 9f 5” x 1" 9?? The right side 0f the neck cmtirsg the mmmon garé?id armry and yam; Made of dag-m was shock, Eioodsmireed Suii, piain soil and ma bleeds+ainvd spada ware sg.zad from the 5pm? vide EXP/,7; During i‘he caurse 9f invesiigaiign, bimds‘mimd cio‘iivzs 3‘? Th2 dcmgasgd ware sziz..d vide E! W1 Bioedsmined dwhgs 0f 'i'he. dzcsasaai afar aufogsv "Jare -eized vidv ExiPl5 Ezized artiaies and sggde were serif far chamicgi anaiysis Vick ExPz’iZ and mes-2mg of biaeé aver cig+hes of :Phe eacmed and spada we” G F, wm‘irmZri vida EXP/14. OU xx , in shgv‘r ‘The Cadz') and aftr compiei‘inn n‘F inves‘riga‘iieni ciaarge ghee? Imam ”Fiiwi ii: The Caum‘ Gf Judicial Magktmfe m‘ Qimimi Precedurz, 197- ri 4 ".44 5essions, Biiaspur. 5i In Qréer ‘i'Q prevtz iii-3 guilty of The. accuied/appeiim‘i, the prosegu‘i‘ian has examined as many a3 11 witnesses‘ 51'a‘iamen'i‘ of Fag accused/apgr’iian'r wm recerdgd under Sac‘fmn 333 9f fhe Cade S‘ Ihere he. denizd the circamsmnczs 31. DnRam-sdhar fj‘upm (PW-4) and cits-reps! repar‘i’ Ex..P,/4 which reveals iimt arb‘ie-mwtem fem! ies xié?e feund we!" the neck 0f the eeceesed and death was hemicide! in nature. pgeiiem, an the nther hand / fi :,/‘ , 4, i, r apgz‘earéng agaias? mm and pizacied inncsenca and faise. impEmi'ion in +hz crime in quasfion. 9 6.. After affron'?§ng an Qppc'nfuniw x313: hearing 1'9 ?%1e par?igs, iaarned Sessiaas Judga cgwvicfed am senmncetj irha @peik‘m as aforeman?ienadh 7, We héva haard ‘ecar‘ngrj ca‘sinszi 35:3? fine. partiasi pergsaé “(E12 jurigmgm m?“ "mad and racord 9f fag Cour? beiQw. wrmi 8. Learnéd cmmse! far tha agpaéi’ams vahemgnfly argua$ fha? in tha present casz, t3n§icf§an is haszd on exfm juijiciJ cmfessie?! and circumsmntiai ewden‘ce- Ewh-a judicia! cos§2ssien is a weak wge 9f gvidence and cn!y exWa. diuciiciai c9nf--s§on 5s no? safs 1’- reEy. In casesf drcumsfamia! evidence, fhz 9msa¢u?ion_ s reguirad :9 grey- complet chain eff circumsmnszs sufficéen‘r fer hypn‘rhesis 9f i‘he guilt 92F the, appellam', bu? in the prasem‘ case, flag: ayidenca gdduced o‘n behalf cf tha grosecu?isn is n9? suffmggn? 1-9 pmvg compizire chaiw cf circumsfanrzs suffician? for drawing inferems 0f The guilt 9f ‘tha appeiimt \} i'he 9. On He Mher hand, ¥aamed Jare- caunse! supgorted judgmen? impugned and argues ‘a‘haf fhz proxcufion has greyed ifs case beyeyid all sEadgw 0f c§aubf aby géducing cimcnmg sad sredibia evidgnce. 10in girder- ?a app.eciatgsfhe argumen‘i gdyancad on behalf gaf The prosecution; we hava examined she widencz adduced on behalf of the prosecufien. In +he presen‘i ease, homicidal dea‘ih es r3. resui‘ir of enie-mer'iem injuries 9f deceased gedrem has no? been sabsi’enfiadiy disputed 9n behaif 9f the 5mg?! {PW—m grid circ. {Pxill-10\ v -, m<n9r+ivgiv ‘-_',‘-,-.‘. .i, daunh+ r 91F i'h?‘ dozyasgd rekd'ing Tr; The fact iha? a? the fime 0'? 1%: nnm>l3nw+ r i‘ Wm <igd. 39 ind ., in thz saw» room dead and the. appeilan+ has nn+ cf,ere.d any exphnafign. 12. According 1‘9 fhe case 0f Tina {grosecutimi convic‘rian is substamiaiiy ba ed cm, "the faHowiag circumzmmgs, udicigi confg§si9n made by the appelhn'!’ To Pramp 5ingh J‘ “l ., v ni “_ ix. ~ c.“ ! r9<znt in The mam 0f ii) On The dark. 9f inciden‘r 141g appglianf was iv) £ffer incident fine. apgeliam dEd mt prawn? in fhe said mom, hi“? r’i" w“&3’” . “ h € n -.. AVI.0 i. G ,a {.u 9"? .Jj €l?5\’ .... . ! PXF g. 35"..“.2Q . . 30.“. ”K3. _l gm)!!! Bed!‘9.!!!! died and whe has. gamed in iurv \I i ’ 1 3. As regards exfm judiciai confess'mn of fhe agpallant, Pmmp Singh (PW-2) has daposari in his evidence that-1' affe'r commission of the offencei 'Hne ‘ aggelieef who is resident .Gf viikxge Larkeaqi came f9 him and made ex-‘rm judicial confessicn that he has kiEed his bmther-in-hw (5min) n requgsnrad +9 snve 1mm Theren‘tem é'ze went fowards field. In his cross-examine‘rion he has gated “Fag? The appellant is hiioneighbgur. 14gx1~m judiciai ccnfessim is i a 9f gvjgjgnngi but mace if is greyed f0 be issue ihe?! same is reiiabie far fine cenvicfien 9f the a-cused. 1.5.In erder fa czhlm of exfm judieiai confessim, fhe prosecuiign is required 'ie preve‘ + i‘na'i' ii“ was made veiun‘mrily and ‘l'hei‘e was seine reiaiionsinip gr interesie'iness. The evidence 0f Prams $ingh (PW-2) dearly esshhiish the? he was aeighismir 9f ihe egpeiienf, fherefere, it can he safeiy eresumed she? the appeiian? was having frus‘? ugen fhis witness Noihihg has heeh asked :h) “this witness reiefing 1’0 any pressure or ‘ihreg? Q i i” >r wave i r. frem ids induazmeaf. Awarding To his smfzmgnt, whiie he Wm: przwn‘.‘ in his heusei a? fha’? ‘rima fhg aggelhgqf mnde extra. juditini mmessim volunmrilyn Whiia dea§ing wk?! 'the 2véézn'réary value of extra ‘jw eonfassim mad-2 under gawkim 24 of The Fvidgncd Ar? +he amx Cour+ in w..- y-« ‘ v. . . , .. ‘ ..r~‘ re cf avidanse. No convic?iw ordimriiy :xn be haved sakiy fhereugm uaip<< same is cerrgbom'ted in matetrig! particular-s. M.Wh§§2 daaiiag with thz same guesiimi fhe Apax Cmwi‘ in fhe maiizr Qf e‘v‘.a§':§.‘ Azad @ $asas“ $ . $?a?a sf Was? asrgaf *2: hakj $21G? if ax‘vs gudiciai confess§an made VQEusmriiy and fru'fh in a fif smite 0f mimd 1' i‘!’ cm ba‘reéies upan nhd canfzssien wii! mve 1'9 pmVe Eke in any other evideace». ?am 2. 9f the <nir4 iudgmznt reads as under:- “v‘... U i “22. An axi‘mjud valuwnry and true and mnde in a fif sfa're of minc’. can be reiied upon bv The court The confession Wm have 1‘9 ba pmvea' %ike may wher’ faci The vaiue 9f The avidzncz as f9 cenfessigni ukez any whey" eviézMa depends upon fhe veracn'y of fhe wi‘mess #o whom if has 1i>een mane. ' ‘F'me vmue , L. 0:I me ‘E evia’enca as ‘i‘o ?ha corxfes‘s’ion depends on the rehabihiy of the wifness Amo gives “the ev§denca I? is mi: open To any cour‘r fo sfar'r wi‘rh a oresumpfion ‘I'ha‘i' exira-judicioi confession is a weak ‘iy'pe of evidence. E‘i’ wouid depend on -i‘ne nature of the circumsfersces, fhe fime when the confession was made and fhe credibiii‘ry of ine wifnesses who speak 1‘0 such a confession. Suc'n a confessicn can be reiiea‘ upon ihe convici’ion can be founded inereon if the evidence ahouf ‘ihe confession comes from +i1e mom‘i‘i of wii’nesses who ogoeor f0 be unbiased. noi even remo‘i‘eiy inimicqi i0 iiie accused, and in respeci of whom nothing is brought out which may fend To indicate ma? he may have a mofive of afir-ibu‘ring on un'i'm‘ii'ifui sfa‘iemenf ‘i'o The accused, i'ne words spoken i0 by i’ne wiiness are ciear, unambiguous and unmistakabiy convey t.e? irhe accused is The perpe‘i'r-a‘i'or of fine crime and noii'iinq is omii’red by The wi‘iness wmcn i ' I may miiiiaie agains'i ii. errer d f A subjeciing i'ne evidence of the Witness f0 n iiigormls ties? an the Touchstone of credibiii‘iy, The exfra-Judiciai confession can be accepted and can be The iiasis of convici‘ion if i‘i' passes iiie iesi' of credibiii’ry" canfession £2009 AR SCW 3730 2mm ATQ sew 757 u ? ' ;xn f§1e prWSJvi' c1153; i'iae evizience g1? Prawn $ingh {PW-2} is as? .bijgh 'i'ha fag? fha’r a‘he epgziian'i' ims made extra. velunfgri!}1 and he was having fa Th and 1'rusf uggn his neigi .Qinnh 9 _ ‘_,. “ As regards przsgnce a? the nanviian'? an 'rha d ‘1; 131‘ inci am in :Wae rgem 91¢ deceased $2dmm. Dham‘tinbai @W-l), wife ef decemed Bedmm has dep» -er§ n hgr evidenge that? ‘rhz appeiiaa? was ma? having cardiai reirzfien wifh‘his wife. Hi5 wife was mi? rzsiding wi+h him. The anneikm+ I ad Tc: come 1* her house. fraquentiv and Q?! the dam of inciden‘l’ he “Lime he eat magi aha stayed in her hausg. Tme aggekant and dece-§ed Bedmm wgre sieepiaqg in the same. mam adioining if- her room A? iate nigh+ her husband cries; Th2?! she wokg lm and sat 141:2? 2r husbaad Las Mm in the fiaor and i .J‘ the agpgllan? was having spacie in his hand. The eppelkzn? alsa i'QEd her that? if she 1m“ came, +hzn he ii§l also kil! her, fhen she wenf inside. her ream. A? The Time sf meming, she snw +ha+ he!" husband wns died as a result? a? Bhjuries. Rambai (PW-19),. daughter ef demased 3edmm, has subsfan y cormbnmfed irhe evidence 9f he?" mafher Dharza'rinbai (PW-1) and has depased ihaf!‘ Her cammissian af the affence the aggeiian'!’ f!ed fram her Y ‘3 r. nf “Fr.-‘ A“. f, ...- r. 3‘ ’t IS‘ Am iS 3‘ ; e?- am<<-e><am§nai'ian she has spech‘ScaHy s'iwked 1'haf'she has ed the incident? 1'9 paiiee. She has denied 'the suggesidan that an the n i dem: the appeilam was no? present ia her hause. 19.132 ence has crass‘examihed Dhanahnbai (PW-1) a? leangfh. in her detaii cross-examinai‘ioa; she has admirrsd ih para 1C! Tha‘l’ she has nat stated the ad af her hushand and had seen the anpeiianf wi‘rh shade. Ede/1 her sttrnen? recarded ahder $ec1'ian 161 0f The Code reveais sha‘r the ahpehant and the de-easea were sieepihg in one roam and she. was slpp W} act 1'ha‘r she had heard sa piag in aha‘rher r93"! enjoining To fha‘r roam. When she woke air; a? marnihg, then she saw dead body af her husband and the appelianf was hair present ahhaugh Dhanatinhai (PW-1) has depased in her evidence fha? she has seen +he incident bu? in fhe iigh‘!‘ af Ex.D/1 her sfa'rernent can be safe.y reiied a? fa The exten‘l’ +ha+ The apiaeiiahf and ‘i’he deceased were h t a “J. s.zegiag in he. ame roam a? The Time 9f incident? and an ‘l'he. secand dnv f s mQming, tha decaa was found dead and. The appeiiam was mt preseni' iw . fha‘r mom 9r in ?hz hou o Dhangfinbai (—1). ; Q _The evidence 9f hanefmbai (PW-1) and Rambai (PW-19) oré sufficient for dwing inference The? a‘!‘ the time f incident the apgeiian't was presien‘l‘ in nmeiian? wn< under obiigm‘ion To offer expionofion in terms of Sec‘tion 106 of fhe Evidence ACT .iirm‘l‘ hos not offered any explong‘tion which is oderee circum$mnces ogoinsf him tho?e oppeiion who is prm' hos coitted fhe offence. .Whiie dealing wifh the estion of offen commif‘red in secrecy ond iremen'r of _!cno'iion, The Aex Court in The mo‘r‘rer of Dhenenjey Cnerjse ‘v’s. swig. ci‘ ‘s‘:’.B.3 and Trimukh Mars Kinee ‘v‘. 5mm sf marasmra “-1” m. 4 has heid 'rhm‘ if fhe fence has been commifted in "crecy, th appeiicn‘r was under obliiion 1'0 offer explanafion and in fhe ohsence of such expionn‘iion, The aforesaid circumstas are icieni‘ for drawing inference fhai' agpelian'r who was haing grudged against The deceased was th person who has commiffed The offence a excep‘l’ 'i‘he an .ody commiffed ‘rhe offence. iJa mom of the deced. In the circums‘ cem , -fr- W- V 3i th cmmed at how the. deceased die-d and who hos injuries, but ‘i'he v th t e-e mm pa:- i ,,.a. 0 2.I f presenT case, fhe proion has proved The foiiowing eireumsfances; . i) The aepelia'r has made extrra judicial confession volunfarily fo Pmfahr Sinoh J (PW \ ’-‘~n m ii) The apeeiian'!’ was present wifh the decease in The some room aT d The Time of incidenT i.e. aT niohT J ' iii) Deeeased Bedrnm was found dead in The inTervening nighT of 25/26.&91, ""-\ ‘ 3(1994) 2 scc 220 4(2006) 10 scc 681 s‘d s PW . D ra (i e e-s e r n +he on ce renu e.‘p p he h gm f e ge‘ nce snH v e nd ob hns n h- secuf n 4K iv) Affer riden‘r fhg appeihnt did n0? present in the. same warn er in the heuse. 9f Thz deronwri, v) The. appellant has m? afferad any gxpirmafion fhgf how “the deceaszd died. Q If 14m aforesaid circf. hypo'thesis wmIH He- possibkz Thar the appelianf was the parsan what has m ether ,i an has caused injuries to hm! 23. As iregdrds The quesi'ien 91F {native in case 9f direct evidence motive lesses its irkpdrmnce, even otherwise, matrix/e only aids in criminality and can be ‘ ‘ inferred an the. basis 9f namre af injury, kind af wean-3n used hm"? 9f the body effee'red and‘a‘rher similar circumsfancesi ‘ 24in The presen‘r case, whiie fhe derensed was sleeping in his man! and was helpless pesi‘rian, ‘l’he appelian‘r has caused fate! injuries aver- his neck by dangeraus weapan i.e. spade. The manner in which ‘lhe appellant has caused injuries, weapan used and the par? of bady iaihere injures were found are sufficien? far- drawing inference ‘rha? the appellant has infen‘rianaliy caused culpable homicide amounting fa murder af deceased Bedrami 25.Af'i'er appreciating the evidence available an recard, learned Sessions JLdne has convici’ed and sentenced the annellant as aforementioned. Conviction d r r' sentence of the appellant are based on clinching and credible evidence sustainable under the lawi 8‘ 26.0n clnse scrutiny of the evidence, (we do not find any illegality in the judgment impugned: The appeal being devoid of merit is liabie to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. The appellant is present in person before the (iourt. Reoistry is directed to send the appeliant before the Sessions .TLdge Bilnspur for serving the remaining part of sentence. / caused injuries 1'9 deceased Bedmm and excegg‘r ’i'he aggz 13v‘1 mi w-r “w- t r ... dayl //’f:~ T. P. Sharma Judge i. i