tsassssf ^'^^^;^^^1^^^^^^^^;''^'Y^^^ "•V::W^ ....w.1'1''1 :': l:";—'/l't»s"'^* A; Ui.e»-:;'.^' . '^s:' -' :l-11inht^ttiMlrli i-A'':(i*;iKfc^:.W'@! ^S^ i- ^^.••-..--.-fS^^^ ESII-189/.C.IaiI) X'.J.P.R.11/94/2,000 ':"\ /' '""-<. APPEAL OF" PRISONEN Wj||t|@pgg|| 23W^^m Wfe.-.^^,,,^ fcsitis»eter< f.f. '•—-»^a(. i •^ yo....Ml.^/.^..............^...N^..^Wl:^^..^..^..^ Father's name .'3^^...°?7^..'^^..to2A.~2^..^^..^^.^'<^^ Residence ..^Cr.U^-..J^"^o.J^. Age ...•^.ft-'^T:............ -......-. ......... Sentencedto:3-^fer.%7<^%i%£;..On..^Z.^:./.S.^..... ......... . ......... Under section ^.0.^/..3.gX...3^...Z^;C-by^TMi-..S^^.i:i^:.r^^g^^^ ~~~^^-rf^- 'T3:T&r77 - ~^7'C^W5^ It is explained to the prisoner that if he states or wishes to be represented by legal practitioner the Appellate Court will not proceed with the base for seven days unless <i-^ legal practitioner appears If the legal practitioner does not appear within seven days he may not heard at all Ifihe prisoner states that he does not wish to be repre- sented by legal practitioner the court may pruceed at once with the case and will nct be obliged to give a hearing to any legal practitioner vvho should appear . 1 5 Date of Application for copy of Judgement Uate on which copyreceived Date on which Appeal sent Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented or not - Yes / No _Z1 _ - , - '^^/ y/ sg No.... ..../7.Z-^ 0.^...4/................... Name .±t.ld.WM.S.^.^:?^O.^W..S^. Confinedin ...................7^.^^^.. Jail ,.5^ZA^^<3%^2^. No ......J^-t'5.//7M^/^Dated .......^-^~/I99 8......... '^\_' •^••wardedto the ^^^3^^EGS^^^^a^^B-%s?c.^%fl.fe^@:S€^ ^l. ... .. , . ^H^^^^'d^^)o'y'!'-^B-f7B^y7 toga'therwhich a copy of judgement or or'der' passed in'ihe case for favourof tr^ni- miss.ion to the proper Appellate Court.-f5"; -ft^-; i3s7-^T? ^-'i/ '<-Tc~<FW^^fJ~/ /n^^^ ila&aipat. flfcBJ... V. Date of receipt in... ........ ................... office Date of receipt record to accompaay the Memo of Appeal to ihe Appellate court No Forwarded to the Dated ....................199, Date ofreceipt in Appellate Court ( P. T. O. ) K' l V XI-HC-78 3^ "ifl-Mlrt'i), »Tfltl'l6,fsldKiy Cv.A. Nt 17-&3 *n^(cTTSh*11<sb t-1-A- Nlb . • ^[ 200 2-4^/77 Sii^i 4ac»)(yil^qqiir) sTi^r^Tf^iN; (PITSITOTsbHlti gTdTWfffsa'sn^T ^irafefN'TOTcff ff fec^ ^TRTC ^3ri;giT3TI^T DB:- Hon'ble Shri L.C. Bhadob. Aa. C.J. & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kuma Sinha, J. 9-2-2007:- Smt. Savita Tiwari, Shri Akhil Mishra, Panel coun^el for the appellants. -awyer for the State/respondent. Oral judgment dictated o|i Da/s. L.C. Bhadoo. Aa. C.J. Criminal appeal No.126p/98 filed by Sitaram and criminal appeal No.2487/99 fited by Ram kum^ r are arising out of the same incident and same judgment delivered by Ac|ditional Sessions Judge, Bemetara, in S.T. No.249/95, therefore, they a judgment. re being disposed of by this common Accused Sitaram was gl-anted bail by this Court vide order dated 24/2/2003 and accused Ram IfCumar was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6/3/2000, but they still in custody. They are in de^ention since 1995, therefore, appeals are heard for final disposal. By these appeals, accus] correctness of the judgment ^ire not able to furnish bail bonds, they are ed/appellants have questioned legality and dated 6-5-98 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara in $.T. No.249/95 whereby learned Additionat Sessions Judge after holding t^e accused/appellants guilty for commission of offence under Section 3012 read with Section 34 of the IPC for commission of murder of Ari/ind sentenced each of the accused to undergo imprisonment for life ^nd to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further und^rgo Rl for one month. They have further P.T.O. -/? s ^l-/' XI-HC-78 3^ -*IWIV\^, STfly'IS, (cldiyy . <-Y- A- Ns. l'2-<3/9g f. <4l*1WI sh^lch ••••••••••••••^"..^/ ^q- 200 <:v- p. -Mo. z^S?-/99 ^ Sll^l ^aqi (li':<f^'sl<^8') 311^T?irR-1 (CT'srr^rshHiqi ?Rirw:Hf?cf3i7^r —2- ^rafe'fl^ wircfr ff fec^ rfSfRR ^STf^tTSIT^T been convicted under section Virendra @ Raja and sentenc< pay fine of Rs. 200/-, each in d^ Rl for one month. Sentences one after the other. In additior convicted under section 323 of six months. Sentence imposetl concurrently with life imprisonm|e 102/34 of the IPC for committing murder of ^d to undergo imprisonment for life and to ^fault of payment of fine to further undergo Itor both the offences were ordered to run to that, accused Sitaram has also been the IPC and sentenced to undergo Rl for under this section was ordered to run ilent. Case of the prosecutio^ 17.3.1995 at 3.20 a.m. Ashokl intimations Ex. P-44 and P-45 that Sitaram and Kumar Kew^ Virendra @ Raja. Body of Arvit of Bhagas and body of Virendifa the house of Jagdish. Based 01] registered after 10 minutes of| left for the scene of occurrenc^, Panchas prepared inquest rep^ on the body of Virendra alias gave memorandum Ex. P-17] pursuance of that bamboo sti^ Ex. P-18. Accused Ram K|u pursuance of that one iron roc| Ex P-23 of the place of occurije was recorded by S.K.A. Nakvi) of Arvind was sent for post Government Hospital, Bemefi(a in brief is that-<ih in the wee hours of |Das Kotwar of village Tendro gave merg pn the police station Khamaria to the effect )t have committed murders of Arvind and |d is lying in the street in front of the house alias Raja is lying in the street in front of above merg intimations FIR Ex. P-46 was |the merg intimations. Investigating Officer after giving notice Ex. P-47 & P-48 to the ^rt Ex. P-1 on the body of Ar/ind & Ex. P-2 |Raja. During the custody accused Sitaram about weapons of offence i.e. lathi, in ^k (lathi) was taken into possession under imar gave memorandum Ex. P-19, in was recovered under Ex. P-20. Site plan snce was prepared. Dehati Nalisi Ex. P-24 Tl Bemetra on 23.3.1995. The dead body nfiortem examination under Ex. P-49 to the where Dr. N.K. Tiwari conducted post P.T.O. XI-HC-78 *<l^fcfT Sh*1|ch 3^ '*{WW^, 9Tf)'H'16, Rldiy^< ___ L^.A^ 1^3/?g- ^; 200 (T.A. z^^^y ' "'- Sii^i 4a«»i(l^i^S'T) 3TI^T.?5Tf^(Ri tPtTSTI^Tshliti STaTWflf?(T3I7^T -3 +i'iiFd41-t tiiti(-fVfffeI^)'<Ri+<ii< ^arf^q'aD^r mortem, prepared post mortem| report Ex. P-16 wherein he opined thatthe death was due to shock and |haemorrhage. The body of Virendra alias Raja was sent for post mor|tem examination under Ex. P-50 to the Govemment Hospital BemetraJ Dr. N.K. Thwari conducted post mortem on his body, prepared post mort^m report Ex. P-3 wherein he opined that cause ofdeath was shock and|haemorrhage. Plain soil, blood stained soil and one HMT make wrist watcl)) of Arvind were taken jnto possession from the place where body of Arvin{l was found under Ex. P-51. Chappfe, one shirt stained with blood, btooi|l stained soil were taken into possession from the place of occurrence irfl 52. Damaged drums (nagada) front ofthe house of Jagdish under Ex. P- were taken into possession under Ex. P-53. One full shirt and full pant ol] Sitaram on which blood like stains were there, were taken into posses^ion under Ex. P-55. One shirt and fuil pant of accused Ram Kumar on wh|ch blood like stains were there were taken into possession under Ex. P-5$. Baniyan of deceased Virendra alias Raja was taken into possession ur^der Ex. P-57. Other clothes of deceased Virendra were taken into posse|ssion under Ex. P-58. Based on Dehati Nalisi Ex. P-59 was registered. R^covered articles were sent for chemical examination to the Forensic report Ex. P-60 was received from Assistant Seroiogist and India, Kolkata. After completion of inv accused Sitaram, Ramkumar Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bem Ex. P-24 and investigation, a detailed FIR Science Laboratory, Raipur, from where Serologist's report Ex.P-61 was received Chemical Examiner to the Government of inv|estigation charge sheet was filed against land Ashok Das in the Court of Additional iletra, who in turn committed the case to the P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3'E? -^Wv\^, ^•rfl'M'is, Riiniyy . ^. ft.^....t2.6;/.?.$..A. *41*4dl sh^lch •••••••"•••••••-'•'•^••/^ 200 ^y-h ^o. ^tfV^-\c\^ 311^1 4d*(yft-i<st<<,ff) 4 sn^rqirf^rN; craTsiTOTaiiiqi ^RTTaiRHfScTSn^T ~ L(- chi'iiFfi'll-i wraYif fecA TI^RSIT ^srf^q'sn^r Sessions Judge, Durg, from received the case on transfer. where learned Additional Sessions Judge Prosecution in order to| persons examined 22 witness^s. recorded under section 313 of they denied the material ap^earing evidence, stated that they are| in the crime. establish the charge against the accused s. Statements ofthe accused persons were the Code of Criminal Procedure in which against them in the prosecution innocent and have been falsely implicated Learned Additional respective parties convicted| Ramkumar as aforementioned charges. Ses|sions Judge after hearing counsel for the and sentenced accused Sitaram and whereas acquitted Ashok Das of all the We have heard learned lcounsel for the parties. Leamed counsel for homicidal death of deceased Dr. N.K. Tiwari PW-8, who and Virendra, has stated that Surgeon in the Government conducted post mortem on tl1 injuries: (i) lacerated wound in the accused/appellants has not disputed l^rvind and Virendra alias Raja. Moreover, coijiducted post mortem on the body of Arvind |on 17.3.19^ he was working as Assistant l|-lospital, Bemetera. On the said date, he 1e body of Virendra and noticed following parietal region, on i bone was fractured i |he size of 3" x %" x bone deep over left ^pening of head it was found that parietal thelengthof5", lacerated wound in t|ie size of 1" x 1/3" x bone deep left side of forehead; (iii) lacerated wound on 1|^ie right ear in the length of 1 %"; P.T.O. ^s./ XI-HC-78 sn^r^rR.ficb (W 311^1 s(it<i+ 3ST -^wwi, ®Tfl*i'i6,Riiiyy . Cv.p.. ^ IL£J/?g" qTERTTanrraT •"••"••"••"''•'•,••WT 200 <L'y. ft-Mo ltiVf]^y ' "• siiSi^i ^aqi (^ct?^(si<^r) SRITWBf^TSIT^T " 5~- ttll^KI-'fl-l t1|t|<-]|'fffe^'<fa|<-lil<' ^STf^R'an^r (iv) lacerated wound in t(ie size of 2" x 3" x 4" deep on right parietal region, parietal bon^ was fractured into pieces and damaged the brain; (v) there was swelling o 3". On account of these inj n n'ght mandibutar region in the size of 3" x jries there was bleeding and clotted blood was also present. On examinaljion it was found that internal organ became pale. All the injuries were an|te mortem in nature and the same were caused by hard and blunt |object. Cause of death was excessive haemorrhage and shock. He conducted post mortem on the] has further stated that on 17.3.1995 he body of Arvind and following injuries were noticed by him: (i) lacerated woi^nd in the size of 1° x 1/3" x bone deep on the right side <|>fforehead; (iii) (iv) (V) lacerated wou|id on the left ear in the length of 1 %"; there was ab|rasion in the size of 3" x 2" on the left shoulder; four abrasionsl %"; on right leg in the size of 1/3" x 1/3" x %" x there was tac^rated wound in the length of 4", 3" in width and 3" deep, fnjury was on the left occipital and parietal region, brokeji pieces of bone piereed into brain. On examination ^f internal organ it was found that they became pale; He has further stated th^t these injuries were ante mortem in nature caused by hard and blunt obje|rt. Cause of death was excessive bleeding and shock. In view of the abdve medical evidence and the evidence of P.T.O. t,/ XI-HC-78 sn^rqiTi^TR; c^TT 3TT^T ^TTT^ ^1<4WI sb^l* 3^ "i<l<<lcl<<, a'rfl'M'ie, f°ldiy^< q^gp S.\-A.nhXii3/.'3^..^-^^ ^QQ (.-v.A- Nl« l-ti'K)- 311^1 tiatti (tyi^si^r) ^cITSiK^f?(T3f1^T RA/-4 Santosh, it is establish homicidal in nature. As far as invoivement of| Arvind and Virendra alias Raja| eyewitnesses produced by the | eyewitness, PW-7 Rambagaj prosecution has also examinetl and PW-17 Kanahiyaram as e^ have turned hostile and even has not been able to elicit any| the crime in question. PW-4 Ss]t was going to watch Holi along near the house of Ashok Kotwjar, Kotwar disclosed that Sitaranh (nagada). When they inquiry by An/ind^these have damaged their drums, th< accused Sitaram. Arvind calle|d which Sitaram inquired as to w|ho am Arvind'. Sitaram came out| attacked Arvind with that ctub account of assault made by standing behind Arvind. Accu^ on his head as a result of whi|t When he woke up, no one was| informed his father Shiv Kum^r which he replied that he migh1| proceetled persofis <tii<iFn<)1-f *i|tifiTi]:fei^t<Rl'Lilt ^siRpTsrcsr d that death of Arvind and Virendra was |accused pereons in committing murders of |is concerned, in this case, there are three Iprosecution namely PW-4 Santosh^injured and PW-11 Hematdhar Diwan. The PW-12 Shivkumar, PW-13 Bharat Sahu I'ewitnesses. But these three eyewitnesses fn their cross examination the prosecution lcircumstance connecting the accused with |ntosh has stated that in ttie fateful night he |with Arvind, on the way when they reached r, Kanahiya and Bharat met them. Ashok \i and Ramkumar have damaged drums further drum owners met them. On disctosed that Sitaram and Ramkumar ^refore, they went in front of the house of Sitaram from out side of the house on is catling, on which Arvind replied that 'l of his house carrying club in his hand and his head. He did not see Ramkumar. On Sitaram Arvind started running. He was ed also assaulted him with the same club ;h he fell down and his eyes were closed. present there. After reaching the house, he u. His fiather inquired about Raja Dau on be at his house. Thereafter, he along with P.T.O. <l>n J -.. XI-HC-78 sn^riwf^iw (PIT3IR?Tsb11<t> s^ -^wwii, w^wie, [^v\wy. „_ c-Y.-A'^'i iz-e3/9s *11+1^11 sb*41ch •••••••••••••-/•<.-.••• ^-A- M» -ii,^]yy . 3ii^,;i tiaw (yiIjqs.'T) 200 STaiWHfscrsn^T ~7' those persons went to the hous womenfolk that Sitaram has atts the house of Virendrabut he wj has stated that he was at tht Sitaram and Ramkumar. He inflo been damaged by Sitaram and | Dau, from that side Arvind and Ashok Das Kotwar as to whaf Sitaram and Ramkumar have let us go to the house of Sitaraijn were also following them. Arv) from inside asked who are you|, Sitaram came out of his house the said lathi on his head. Thei|i same lathi and then they ran a^ carrying rod but they ran PW-11 Hematdhar Diwan has Tendro, Arvind asked him th^ replied that he would not go ot Arvind was having a dagger ^ rang, on inquiry that person (<i said that Sitarm and Ram that let us goand see who is b^ call Raja Dau on which he cal| the house along with Ashok. H^ front of the house of Sitaram. p house having club and rod in inflormed awpy Kurrtar «hl<llc1''fl-lt11HnTfffS<^t'<RlWI< %3rf^lT3n^T ^e of Raja Dau alias Virendra, he informed icked him and Arvind with lathi. He went to <as not at his residence. PW-7 Rambagas place where drums were damaged by the village Kotwar that drums have Ramkumar. He went towards the house of ^antosh were coming. Arvind inquired from has happened then Ashok replied that famaged drums on which Arvind said that i, he was also with them. Owners of drum |nd called Sitaram, Sitaram while coming Arvind replied " 1 am Arvind". Thereafter, |:arrying lathi in his hand and attacked with leafter, he also assaulted Santosh with the |/ay. Ram Kumar also rushed towards them and went to their respective houses. lalso stated that on 16.3.1995 he went to at he is going to watah Holi on which he which Santosh accompanied Arvind and 'ith him. 10-15 minutes thereafter call bell isclosed himself to be Ashok Kotwar and are assaulting Arvind on which he said sating. Kotwar asked him to stay there and |ed Raja Dau. Raja Dau came out and left also followed them. Dau started talking in iitaram and Ram Kumar came out of their their hands and started attacking Dau. He P.T.O. / ,• /,' XI-HC-78 *11+<ni sh*1ich 'ssi -^ww^, w^ww, isicil+iy<, ***«r*»t»******V*****» CT'A- No. ?^>6: 3ll^-?l ^iach (y?3'sl<t.'iT) 200 sn^r^Tf?^ (raT3TR?Tsb11°h ??dTWHf?(T3n^T <2- *i'yf<-i<l1-f wqcfffffe^ <.Kiw< ^srf^TTsn^T asked them 'who are you', on'^hich Sitaram rushed towards them, when he attacked him, he was able <o protect him, but he fell down and he ran away towards the house. Ashc|k Kotwar met him on the way, when he fell down, Sitaram attacked him \H's \ lathi twice or thrice. He sustained injuriesnear waist. The evider|ce of RA/-11 Hematdhar Diwan has been disbelieved by the trial Court in [para-19 of the judgment. We have perused polic4 diary statement (Ex.-D/5) of this witness recorded under Section 161 Cil.P.C.. Perusal ofthis statement shows that this witness has not stated that he witnessed the accused persons attacking Virendra @ Raja. h|e has made improvement in his evidence before the Court. He has b^en rightly disbelieved by the trial Court. Therefore, evidence of R/V-4 S^intosh and PW-7 Rambagas remains to be scrutinized. Evidence of PV^ mentioned eariier, shows that Sitaram in attacking deceased '-4 Santosh and PW-7 Rambagas, as Sitaram attacked Arvind with Lathi on his head, as a result of which he ^ustained injuries. In cross-examination of these two witnesses, defence t\as not been able to elicit any circumstance to discredit their evidence in re^pect of the fact of involvement of accused Arvind. The medical evidence of Dr. N.K. Tiwari (PW-8) has corroborate^l the evidence of these eyewitnesses. He has stated that injuries inflicte|d on the head of Arvind were caused by hard and blunt object. It was lacerated wound in the size of y x 3" and 3" deep on occipital and parietal region, broken pieces of the t] lacerated wound on the right si bone, bone was not fractured. such only injury No.5 was fata noticed by the doctor that Injury No.5 was one of head pierced into brain and other injuries were simple in natur^ like abrasions. Even though there was ie offorehead, that was only deep upto the Other lacerated wound was on left ear, as on account of which there was excessive P.T.O. ^' XI-HC-78 sn^T^iTf^iw cW3llSi'lshtllch 3^' '^l<llcl<<, ®l{l<1'l6,(s|(1|^|y . (Y.<vH'> (2&J/5S irTO^TT gwrar "•"•"•""•/""•••/Tn'200 fv.A- rfo - -i-^gy/9^ Sll^l Wh (4=li^sf^!iT) 9 STdTWHfN'STI^T - ^~ bleeding and shock and the Samaruram have categorically the head ofArvind. Therefore, i( by Sitaram on the head of de<j died. The manner in which, the deceased Arvind with lathi on which bone turned to pieces a] accused Sitaram to cause evidence of these witnesses Sitaram inquired from inside a^ am Arvind'. After identifying without having any talk with Art Sitaram attacked deceased Ant and skull bone was fractured the considered opinion that for the commission of murder any illegality or infirmity in deceased died. PW-4 Santosh and PW-5 ^tated that accused assautted with lathi on is established that fatal injury was caused jeased Arvind and on account of that he force with which accused Sitaram attacked lis head that is on vital part as a result of alnd pierced into the brain. intention of the fc d|sath sHows hihi As far as involvement Sitaram in committing murder two witnesses have not stat4d deceased Virendra alias Raja | alias Raja. Evidence of PW-1 does not inspire confidence of| the trial Court that he was not e]y Now only cireumstantial is iron rod recovered at the in^t »hi<<rM4i-<tiit«-irffte<^'<rai<<;i< ^;3.ri^q'gn^r . . ..^ of Arvinddfe writ large. Moreover, that Arvindsimply called Sitaram and to who are you then Arvind replied that 'l from inside he came out with lathi and rind without any rhyme or reason accused ind who sustained fatal injury on the head pierced into brain. Therefore, we are of ac|cused Sitaram has rightly been convicted W Arvind and to this extent we do not find the ji)dgment of the trial Court. ahd of the accused/appellant Ramkumar and 3f Virendra alias Raja is concemed, these in any manner that Sitaram attacked or accused Ramkumar attacked Virendra l-1ematdhar Diwan, as mentioned above, the court and has rightly been rejected by yewitness to the incident. svidence that remains against this accused •tance of this accused which was found to P.T.O. tp XI-HC-78 sri^r^r)?^? cPITSITOrsbtiict) 3ST "qiqifl^l, S'tfl+l'l?, RdlUy r^- .OCP'.-.H0-..'.^. *<l*icil sh+fich •••••••*••••»• • •y^'• CV-A- ^ ' "2-2(8.:?- 311^14fl<»>(li?itd'!"yT) 10 200 ?TcITWtrf?tT3:n^T /° gr<|)Up arid be stained with blood, in this P-60 is there which has beer) mentioned that the said iron serologist's report iron rod was| report that blood was of which the test. Moreover, there is no| on the rod was of the blood the ground that rod was reco^ human blood was found on thal with the murders of Virendra Ramkumar articles K-1 and K-E as per the chemical examine^ blood. As per the serologist's marked as item No. 53 and accused Ramkumar but origii|i ascertained on account of the if we presume that human there is no report that what the shirt ofthe accused. Furthe|r, shirt of the accused was 6f th|i based on above, accused canr|ot ofVirendra alias Raja. blobd w^s As far as conviction of Virendra is concemed, there Sitaram in any manner atta); evidence is concerned, as pet blood on lathi marked at 'H' Which <til<lfd41-1 KIKi-il'iffWI'TRlTZR ^srf^R'an^T c^nnection chemical examainer's report Ex. marked as "I". In Ex. P-60 it has been |rod was stained with blood. As per the stained with human blood but there is no Igroup because blood was not sufficient for |report that human blood which was found of the deceased. Therefore, merely on tered at the instance of this accused and I, accused Ramkumar cannot be connected Arvind. Full shirtand full pant ofaccused -|2 were sent for chemical examination and r's report same were found stained with 1-eport full shirt K-1 and full pant K-2 were I. Human blood was found on full shirt of of blood on the full pant could not be fact that same was disintegrated. But even was found on the shirt ofthe accused, group of the blood which was found on r, there is no report that blood found on the )|e blood group of the deceased, therefore, be connected with the murders of Arvind 5h ^ccused Sitaram for committing murder of is no evidence on record that accused fcked Virendra. As far as circumstantial the serologist's report there was human was recovered at the instance of the P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3:n^T^)TR-fi'b ctStTSn^Tsbtllcb 3^ -^ww-ii, gxfl.M'is, [e|diy^< ___ cv. A.M«. ll-C3/?^ /> *11*IMI Sh^lch •••••••••••••/••••; • •• ^q- 200 C-r-A- /^o- 1-ifty. )jy 311^1 ^acn (4clid'sl'^liT) 11 ?RITW:Hf?(T3n^T 7/- nlo ttat accused Sitaram. But there is deceased and again whether deceased Virendra alias Raja. 2' belonging to Sitaram humar could not be ascertained disintegrated. Blood on pant| serologist's report Ex. P-61 but| group of the same and also th|( blood group ofdeceased Viren<)ra oih report that,that blood was of the group of blood was of the group of the blood of (pn full shirt and full pant articles 'J-1 and J- blood was found but origin of the blood account of the fact that blood was of Sitaram was human blood as per |there is no report that what was the blood )|ere is no report that the blood was of the atias Raja. Therefore, there is ni connection with murder of Vin and Ramkumar. Similariy, the against accused Ramkumar to In the result, (i) Criminal Appeal ^ is allowed. Convi<rtion section 302/34 oflthe and Virendra alia^ said charges He| required in any ot| (ii) Criminal Appeal partly allowed. H IPC for committin! and he is conviction under acqi^tted *i'iil<-i41-< tiiii-il'^''tec^'<lN+c;i< ^STf^q-gn^r ocular or circumstantial evidence in indra alias Raja against accused Sitaram •e is no direct or circumstantial evidence ;onnect him with the murder ofArvind. lo. 2487/1999 filed by accused Ramkumar and sentence imposed on him under IPC for committing murders of Arvind Raja are set aside. He is acquitted of the be set at tiberty forthwith, if he is not ler case. (Mo). 1263/1998 filed by accused Sitaram is is conviction under section 302/34 of the murder of Virendra alias Raja is set aside of the said charge. However, his section 302/34 of the IPC for committing P.T.O. ~!al /(^. XI-HC-78 3^ "i<l<<l<'|i|, »T(1y'l6, Rl<-ll+iy ^W^i[ sh»4|ch ••••••'•••••••y"---- ^py 200 <;7.fl.^. -itfVf-^ ^ 3li^i law (ytl^'5!^) 12 an^r^rR-fi'* craT311<iilsbl(|eb ^RiTW.afwsn^r f^ murder of Arvind liable to be dism the IPC is also m is liable to be Sd/- Acting Chief Justice B^.- |is maintained and to that extent, appeal is )ssed. His conviction under section 323 of ^iintained and to that extent also the appeal disn|iissed. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- ' : SunUKumarSinha Judge ctiiiFcitfl-f tiiHciTfftei^l'<Ri«i< ^ari^rq'sd^T P.T.O. d/ .'.^ '., 'Ay^ r ^. XI-HC-78 3^ •^WWii, SnS\WI«, Rlcll+iy __ C'vA.^o. 12-63/^g' ^ TTTO^fTg^TT^ •"••"•••••••^'•''•" ?(7 200 (T.fl.^. -iliVf-^ ^ 3<l^l Macn (^lij'5!'^') 12 3I1^T<Brf?^i»R cRT3TI^Tsfttiiti ^rareKdfBcTW^T (i-\ murder of Arvind liable to be dismi the IPC is also m< i&liable to be disnhissed Sd/- Acting Chief Justice Bar<> is maintained and to that extent,