^ ...,t-;SS!s"s |;^B^ •?."•- I» THB HIGH COCTRT OF JUOICATBBS AT BaAaPHR(GHHATTISGARH) APPBM-.JETNQEa SBG. 374(2) CR.P.C,_ Gjeiainal Apoeal No» ')4-S___/2ooi, M'PELLANT (la custody) Chhabilal aged 30 years son of Bisabt»»by casfee Sond^ rssldent o£ vlllage Badat. Police Statlon NaAaEpur Bistt.Kariksr (Bastar) (Chhattisgart>) VEKS0S RBSPONOBNT (pcssecat-lon) Sfeafee o£ Oihatfelsgarh 'Rirough s P.S,Nari»aJ3>nF Distt.Katdser (Ctahattisgarti) ZSx^......_. MR3T APPBAt. BSF08S THIS HON*abE OOBaT. iS' ;(<: -.•- XI-HC-78 aiI^T^rf^IR; tW STT^T sPTT?? ^"^:;t^|s37?,;^^^S^^'S^ ^S^.W-^^^^L ^.^^.^•^s^^- *TTHCTT!Sfll<=»> 7SI •^WM^, W<S\W\6, [sXDKriy ^_ O^, A,/^^, ^ 200^ 3TT^?Tira^T ('^fg^W) TTW Hfltf 3I1^T &ivision^ BenciiL - Hon'bie Aftr. L.C. Bhadoo and Hon'bis r. V.K. Shrivastaya, 4-9-2Q06 Mf. Amiyw.am Tiwsrj apjssSlant. Mr. b.K. Swair'e, Deputy l^^yygp fo" fh^ Ststs/r'sssondes' Orcl judgmerit'dwtstsd Per L.C. Bhadoo. J: - ^S Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocates for t.he •<•!. ' ^ovt. )AdvocQte with Mr. M.P.S. Bhctia, Panel rlit. Dais. on Selst udAe 8y this appeai undsr' appsilant hos cholienaed the le) c-^^vic^lQn c-nd ordsr' of ssntsnds i"ddjtionai Ssssions Jud9e, i<nn| iearnsd Additional Ssssions for commission of offence und4 the murde" of his wife Devsntinl far !ife. Case of the prosecution,| 28"' & 29'11 Moy, 1998, the other famiiy members vie.re sie^j the wee hours of 29'" Msy, 19^ wQ'ke up and saw that de.ceased| she went new Oevantin Bai and ar.d her neck was cut. She enquil tiKiTci^-i '<iitiTfffe^l'<Ri<?ii< ^3Tf^IT3I7^T JJ. 1-ion 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C., the accused/ |siity and correctness of the judgment of dcted 13 October, 2000, pssssed by t.he |<er, jn Ssssions Tria! No.291/98, whersby ^e ofter hoiding the Qccused/copeSlsnt guiity |r- Section 302 of the I.P.C. for committini |Bai, sentenesd him to unde-go imprisonment ccdussd in brief, is thst in the intervening night of ussd, decsssed (wife of the occussd) and ;ping after taking their meals. However, in 8 Tetobai (PW-l), mothsr of the accused, Devantin 8ai hcs not woken up, thsrefore, saw that shs was lying in the pooi of blood •ed cbout the pr'esencs of hsr son Chhabilal, P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3n^rqiTR^i+ (raTWWshllt' •^•- :2^S:- -f?:^S;S^S^@£ *11*1MI a>TfT^> 3ST "i<|<)|cl'i|, ®Tfl+1'l<o,(sicliyy Go^A.^S W[ 200 / Sii^i y^<»> (tc'(^'!"^T) ??araT fffN sn^T df but he wcs not sresent 'm the h< deceosed. HeQring the screams UB. The matter wss reoorted b'l' Polics St^tioriS NGrhGfDur* ot 11 "egister'ed vide F.I.R. (Ex.P-2) Investigating Officer took up th^ aiso given by Bischu (PW-2). Tne| oecurrsncs and sftsr givinq no'} Psnchnams (Ex.P-38) of the dsacj ssnt for post-mortem exQminctl where posT-mor'Tem was prepared post-mortem repprt Ex[ svncoDe due to haemorrhaoa I.ivestigsting Officer took into froni the piace of occurrence biood stained mot fKathri) froiti Ciothss of the deceased were tcl| Ex.P-8 was prepared by the possassion under Ex.P-9. Aftsr compietion of inves^ of Chief Judidol Magistrcte, Sessions Judge, BuStar, Jagdisip^i Judqe r'sceived the cass on Ths prosecution in order| examined 11 witnesses. conduitted anld under Invelst Ksnker pitr transfer Stctenkent ^rafepEto wTCft'ir'fetfl-rf^resK ^sif^irsn^r buse. Axe was lying neor the body of ths Tetoboi, other family membsrs also wake Bisahu (PW-2), father of the accused,in D.30 a.m. on 29-5-1998. The case was kinder Section 302 of the I.P.C. and the ^ int<estigation. Merg intimation Ex.P-1 was |Invest]gating Officer left for the scene of ice Ex.P-3 to the Psnchss, preparsd ths body. The' dead body of Dsvantin Bai was on to Primar'y Hsalth Csntre, Narharpur, jted by Or. Dsvendr'a Nag (PW-8). He ,P-3A. He opined that the fflode'of desth is the nature of death is homicldal. The wssession blood stcinsd soii snd piain sosl Ex.P-4. He siso took into possession the the olcce of occurr'ence undsr Ex.P-5. ;en into possession under Ex.P-6. Site p!an •iqatinq Officsr. The oxe u»os taksn into ligstion, charge sheet was filed in the Court ', who in tur-n committed the case to the ^r, from where !ecrned Additionci Sessions for trial. to sstabiish char9£ agsinst the accused of the accused was .i-acordea ynder P.T.O. laftiWiliiLuirttii".: f' XI-HC-78 3TT^T ^iT f^TR; tCT'311^5T*l<i* S<'--KW%. (rmdTai^i* ~FS[ ^ii-yid^, WTfl'tf'ie, Rf^iyy ..&.-.A-..IAS/ e ^R; 200 ( 3TT^?Tiraw (yit^q^a') BTcrTgTHf?(T3TI^T Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in wh5| him and stcted thct he is innod eritne. eh he denied the materici Qppearin9 a9ainst ent cnd has been falsely impliccted !n ths'. Sessi^ns Learned Additionai A.G.?. ond counseJ for the accusl mentioned in para 1 of this judi We have heard Mr'. Ami^ counsei for the appeliant and Advocate with Mr. M.P.S. Bhati State/respondents, and perused Learned counssl for the a| decth of decessed DevaRtin Bai the medica! evidence of &r. &ev Tetobai pW-1), B'sahu O'W-2), Sinyh (PW-5) <& Saandarai (PW-( injury on neck, establishes the f< was homicidisl in nctu?-e. Now, coming to the imoiv^me in qusstion, learned counsel fo| pr-osscution evidence, the decej Joimobai (PW-3) and othe" chiidi evdsnce that they .had heard svidenea of the prosacution wi' +l'!<Frl-if1-< WRTt' ff fS^S <Rl«K ^;3ri^IT3n^T Jud9e ofter hearing the argutnents of ;9, convictedsnd sentenced the accusesi as nfent. ^akant Tiwari <& Mr. Aryind Sin9h, learned Mr. D.K. Swslfe, lesr-ned Deputy 6ovt. 9ft, iearned Ponel Lowyer on behaif of the Ithe record. ipellant have not disputed the foct that the |ivas homicidcl in nature. Apart from thct, sndra Nag (PW-8) ss also the evidence of Jaimobci (PW-3), Sagsu (P'A/-4), Kunwar -6|), who saw the body of bavantm Bal having kct that the cause of death of Devantin Bai snt of the accused/appeiiant in the crlme the appeilant argued that as per the assd tvas sleeping nsar Tetobs; (fW-1), flen, and theye is nothin9 in the pr'osecution (•he cries of the decesaed. as such the •^esses 'is uniiatura! and does not inspire P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3T[^T?iTR.<i<+> irar W^?T giTRi ie.: .^g^^^^l <TW<?TI Sh^Tcb 3^'^iFnwr, oTfl'M'is, (aidi+iy &, A./^s/ G. ^ 200 3ii^i ^ai»i(yt^si^'T) STgTW^fN'w^T confidence. Had Devan+in Bas woj there was no occasion that Devaihtin Other argument of iearned couns^i ths accused i-ncds extra Juciici^l Moreover, the extrs Judicial conf^ voiuntary on aecount of the fact viiiagers caught hold of ths acci^sed thsrefore, in the presence of so extrajud'cicl confession. On the other hond, learl rsspondents supported the Judgm^ As far as the first crgume concerned, as per the prosecutio| tokino their meal went for sieeo ivher, the ciececsed was asieep, th neck with the axe, as a resuit of v of 3" x 1" x 3" and muscies, vessei found cut. Therefore, when the of daceassd Devcntin Bai while s' cttack there was no oceasion for h. merit in the ar9ument of iearned c. Now, coming to the point of wce voluntary or not, Bisahu (PW-^ tll'llfd'fl-l HWvfi T! fS^S 'KlW.K, ^i 3f1^'IT STI^T Q+tacked with axe by the accused, then Bci would not have raised the cries. si for the cccused/appeilant is that when confession, the Potice was pr-esent. ssion of the accused cannot be scid to bs •hat as par the prosecution evidence, the and he was brought in the vii!a9e, many villagers, under fesr, he made the ^ied counsei appearin9 for the State/ Intof the tria! Court. jit of leamed counsei for the appsiiant is evidence ail the family members after and the cose of the prosecution is that fe accused assaulted the deceased on her f(hich she received a cut injury in the size |s, earotid srtsry & second vertebra we.re ac|cused gave a blow with an QXB on the neck ^ie was sleeping, on account of the said ^r to raise cry, as such, vse do r.ot find any bunsel for the appelicnt. f extra Judicia! confessiori whethar ssroe |), fathet' of the sccussd, has stated in his P.T.O. XI-HC-78 sn^r^Tf^iN; awsn^rshtfiti ...f.-'^; IBi:-^«^ASS» N(»T<fTa»*TT<=b 3ST -i|l<llc1'i<, BTll'M'IS, fsjfll'M^ .^.^u^. f, ^ 200 f 3)1^1 <4at»> (yityq^iT) SRiTwnfN'an^T svidence thst when they woke aecussd was not 'n the hoy?e, '^ Theresfter, the v'!la9ers of '^ accused, in the viliaqe, the villaa^rs enauired from him on which the occused smd that he has committed th^ tnurder of Devantin Bai. Simiiar is the svidencs of Jcimobai (PW-3), s'l^sr'of the accused, who was pressnt on the fatsful ni9ht clong with -her hus avidenee that on the fateful nig went fo?- sleep, on hearin9 the ^ries of her mother, she went towsrds the body of the deeeosed and foun^ was oozinq out cf it, cxe wias i\| In cross-exafflination of sabout the extra Judicicl confes^ sccused was brouqht to the vill °hl<lf(-l41-f WRff ff fS^S <R]«K ^aif^q-gn^T jp and saw the body of Devontin Bai, the |hereas, in the night he siept in the houss. ^'illsSe: Path"ina!s br'ought Chhabila!, the ^and Sagau (PW-4). Shs has statsd 'n her |it, the aecused snd othar family members that neck of the deceased was cut, b!ood ing there and the accussd was not at the rssidenes. Tnereafter, ths viila^ers coliected on the scens of oecurrencs, ir! the evening the accused wgS br^ught in the village snd On enquiry by the viilaqers he ssid that he has murMered Devantin Bai. Similar is the evidence o- ScgGu (PW-4)—brother-in-li|w of the occused, Kunwar Singh (fW-5], Sasnaard (PW-6), Dhsnycj (PW-f), garib Dos PW-IO) & Kesuram 0=>W-11). these wi+nesses, nothin9 hcs been ssked ion msde by the accussd befors them. It has not come in cr'oss-examinsticln of thess witnesses or sny other evidence that when ths sccused rnada ex^ra judicis! confession befors tha viiiagers, the Police was pressnt. There i^ nothin9 on record to show that when the laae cnd enguiry was made from him os to a'hether at that time, hs was fr ghtened a" made sxtra judlcial confsssion under cny threat or fear. Infere|nce cennot be drawn mersiy because he was P.T.O. iMiiniuiiin iiT'r'T'i XI-HC-78 sn^T^TRaTT aw 3n^Tg;tir°ii ..^fs-. a;Kas: T5? -yi'lllcf^, ^fllw'IS, (°l<-ll<-iy qTtfcTI sh*1ict» ^ 200 3f^ V^V (ia1^ ^ff) g?gTWHf?tT3n^T brought by the vi'iagers of oth^i frightened. As per Section 241 judicial confession made by the a( of the confession appears to inducement, i-hreaf or promise j^ accused pefson, proceedmg from\ opimon ofthe Courf, togive •the to hi reasonable . for supoosi^s advsntage or avaid any evil of\ firoceedings against hinf. Nothint occused msde extra judicial con| promise, rather ciose fairiiiy me; father, sister and brother-in-lcitt accussd have c!ea>-ly ststed that befora them. In the circumstances, .thei conclusion of the tria! Court that accused was voluntary, as such, w« advanced by learned counsel fc ccnfession w;ss not voluntary. mother sf the accused, Bisahu ( (PW-3) - sister of the accused accused that on the fateful nigh ?iPlf<-l41-f i<Wvi\ if fS^S <Rl^l<. ^; srf^R'sn^i ;r viilage to his house, therefore, he wos of the Indian Evidence Act, i.872, extrea :cused becomes inodmissible "ifthe making fhe Caurt to hwe been caused by any wing reference to the charge agoinst the afierson m authorify and sufficisnf, in the •ccused person grounds which wouldappear y 1-haf by making it he would gain any a ten'.pord nafure in refersnce tc ths has come on record to indicats that the Fession under any inducement, threat or ibers of the accused themseives namely, who had no ar-udae or bics aqainst ths 1-he gccused mads extrajydisia! confession e is nothin9 on record to differ from the the extra judicial confsssion mod®by the do not find any substance in the a^ument the appellant that the extrc judicial Apart from that, it has c^me 'm the evidence of Tetobai (PW-1) - fW-2) - fathsr of ths sccused, Jaimoba! ^ Ss9au (PW-4) - brother-in-law of ths |, the accused and othsr family member-s P.T.O. 1-; XI-HC-78 3T^?r^rteRi BETsn^frgiiTR; WK^i-:"~'~' SS^.WS^S!, Son /'E^ </'': / -' ;!-" ,- c<. 1 '•IA^ *TTqcTT<3i*( '3:si 'qraicra', ^T^WW, {st<ni'My< ^-..<x;...6;.^.S.. ^ 200 3T1^?r ^acti ('i^li^'a^ir) S?tfrWHfi?T'3TI^T went for sleep in the houss cf^ei when the mother of the accitsed Devcntin Bci, wife of the accus^ and it hsss coms in svidance thdt Pathrinala by the yillagers of th|nt the accused after commission occurrence and brought bcek |;) villsae shows thst the.accused Isft the vil.'age. Ths soid condu^ S of the Indjan Evidence Act, why he left the house in the circumstances that goes. c^ains invoivement of the accused confession mada by the isceuse^ Fo." the foregoirsg recsoj the reasoninqs qiven by the trif bssed on legal evidsnce, as such^, Court with the findinQ of the tr| In the resu!t, we do no liabie to be dism'issed and it is Sd/- L.G.Bhadoo Judge chi'iiF<i41-f Hwvfi ii fs<S <Ri<^i< ^;3Tf^IT3II^T ^r takin9 their meai and on the naxt n'ornjng woke up ond found the dead body of id, the accused was not present in the house he wcs brought to the village from yiilcge: Vi'iiage. Jhevefore, subsequent conduct of of criqie i.e. absconding fr'cm the pisce of t>y the villagers of Viiiage; Pathrinala to his Iwos involved in the crime and thot is why he :t of the accusad is cdn'.'ssibls unds," Ssction [1872. The accused has not expiained as to night. Therefore, this is also one of'the the accused, which corroborates in the criffle coupled Blth extra .iudicio! bsfore the above mentwnsd witnsssss. |)s, ive do not find sny rsason to diffsr frofr, Court and the conviction of the accused is ,there is no ground for interference by this lalCourt. cdainst find any substanceJrLthis appsci, same is h^reby dismisged.^^^____ _- Sd//- V.K.Shrivastava Judge P.T.O. K