sn^tyx 6-<i<t> gqign^igmiw 75ST BTpri^T, ^ftW^, Rlrtiyy ^r ^^...^.A-^o-a.^.^ 200 an^r Tra^e (ipf^w) •^iiw^iftflsn^i APPELLANTT (In Jail) 'kwld'il") ^WvS ^fwS <h^n ^Tiffinaii^r -V RESPONDENT: fAppeal underSection374 (2) Beko Dhurva, son of Beko Kooma, Madiya, aged 42 years, resident of Raikot Gudrapara, Police Station Kodenar, District Bastar (Chh.G.) State of ChhatKsgarh, Through: P.S.Kodenar, Distt. Bastar. ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure. 1973) reus- Division Bench: • Hon'bte SD Hon'bleSI 25.4-2007:- iri L.C.Bhadoo & ri Dhirendra Mishra. JJ. Shri Ratindra Mishra, coi|nsel for fte appellant. Shri Akhil Mishra, Panellj.awyerfor tteState/respondent. Oral judgment dictated o^ L.C^Bhadoo. J. of sentence dated 2-5-2001 pa; Da/s. This appeal is directed as|ainst the judgment of conviction and order sd by the 4 Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur in S.T. No.374QOOp whereby leamed Addittonat Sessions Judge after holding the accused^appellant guilty for commission of offence underSection 302 of the I.P.C.J for life & tQ pay a fine of Rs.SOfl undergo R.l. fbr 6 months. sentenced him to undergo imprisonment /-, in defautt of payment of fine to further 3S-HC—78 75?T ^\WW*1, ^WKt., ^!<ftWy. IIG) ^Wvll *Nlcb "WI. 200 sn^i ^i R-ii.'h ^TT 3TT^?T $h*iicr> an^niTEB (^fg^w) 'renw ^ifOT sn^i befc/re The case of the prosec| Kosa had died 10 yeare deceased) to his resktence, a^ was having from the former Beko Dhurva. Beko Dhurva<,u^ starfed hter as to why he has brought 3 about 4 p.m. the accused towards him to attack him bu( attacked Tule Bai (since dect accused as to why he is accused. He attacked her on and blood started oozing out of The accused ran away from Kotwar Ramu. Next day momirlg Bai. Thereafter, Beko Kosa re(j station Kodenar. V. S. Chande) FIR Ex.-P/4 and merg occurrence, prepared site plan P/5 on the body ofthe deceasefl. postmortem examination to the Ex.-P/1-A on 2-7-2000 where Di] and opined that cause of deatti| of the fracture of the skull bone. custody the accused gave got recovered woodenclub und< 'klllcfl'l'l ^mvS 'ifjyA <h((i< iT3Tfim3ii^r tition, in brief, is that as the wife of Beko i, ttiertfore, he brought Tule Bai (since his wife, along with 3 children which she h|usband, which was not liked by accused 4^ed to say to hiscousin brother Beko Kosa chi^renalong with Tule Bai. On 30-6-2000 at quarrelling with Beko Kosa, he rushed he ran avray. Thereafter, the accused dec^ased) because she was saying to the att^cking her husband which infuriated the head, as a result ofwhteh she fell down ]the injury. She succumbed to the injuries. |he place. Beko Kosa infonned viltage viHagers came and saw the body of Tule jorted the matter on 1-7-2000 in the police (PW-6), Station House Officer, registered intimtition Ex-P/12. He left for scene <rf |Ex.-P/13, He also prepared inquest Ex.- I. The body of the deceased was sent for primary Health Centre, Bade Kilepal under i|. T.S. Nag, (PW-1) conducted postmortem |was shock and haemorrhage on account His report is Ex.-P/1. While in the police mem|arandum Ex.-P/S, in pursuance of <hat, he ^rEx.-P/7. XI-HG—78 3^q' •<<1<11<?1<1, SiTfl^'Ko, fsKrtl^y Ml^dl (h^ll* "ff^ 200 sii^yr tiara? (1pf^R?i) sv^v ?n R-fi.=ti WT ^ffT^T sti*l ?^RiiW(iftd sn^i CM<i^<ft'i^fiIi<ay ^fe^ <f<t*$i< ^3TRPT3|I^?T After completion of ttie Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1 the case to the Sessions Judg Sessions Judge received the jnvesUgation, chaige sheet was flled in the Class, Jagdalpur, who in tum committed ^, Jagdalpur from where teamed Addltional on transfer. The prosecution the accused was recorded denied material appearing cdse exslmiiked 6 witnesses at the trial. Statement of un^er Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he agai^ist him in the prosecution evidence. Learned 4th Addittonall counsel for the respecthre par<ies as aforementioned. Sessions Judge after hearing leamed i, convicted and sentenced the accused We haveheard leamed (sounset for the parties. Learned counsel for homicidsil death ofthe deceas^d stated that the accused attackeld result of which she succumbetl conducted posbnortem on the were 2 injuries on the head, asj membrane of the brain was haemorrhage, death was above, tt is establlshed that th|i nahire. (he accused/appeltant has not disputed I. Moreover, Beko Kosa has categorically the deceased with club on her head, as a to the injuries. R(V-1 Dr. T.S . Nag who trody of the deceased has stated that there a result of which skull bone was fractured, fuptured, cause of death was shock and honlteidal in nature, therefore, in view of the ils death of the deceased was homfcklal in As far as involvement question is concemed, PW-2 of the accused/appellant in the crime in Beko Kosa, husband of Tute Bai (since XI-HC—78 T5ST'<fl<<ICi-M,8iT[lwiS, RlP»iyy 4 'WTCW *HI«b "W^ 200 311^1 ?iT Pi-li^ ^an 3TT^T sn*llcn an^r T^H; (idfyRiT) 'RgTWafeTCT^I sttted Th® ttead deceased) has categoricalty wife were at their residence. the deceased with club on her succumbed to the injuries. occurrence. The above eVidebce medical evidence. In cross-exfeminah'on been able to eticit any circuihstance witness, ratherlhis witness hasjnot witnessing the accusedassauHfng accused in Uie crime is established. Learned counsel for the and husband ofthe deceased E| with his brother as to why he wfth her, therefore, he startecl deceased tried to intervene, cause her death, therefore, beyond Section 304 Pari:-!! ofth| On the other hand, supported the judgmentofthe tifial ofthe The undisputed facts with his brother on the grwind Tule Bai along with her and <»t fateful day Beko Kosa ran aw^iy behween them, in a fit of anger, | thatwhy she is intervening, in <sbl-yl<"f4t'l 'ICTPCRf ^f^St <nqt$l< ^siRw sii^i that on the fateful eventng he and his accused came with a club and aUacked I, asaresultofwhtehshefelldownand Thereafter, he fled from the scene of of this witness is corroborated by the of this w'rtness, defence has not which discredit evidence of this been cross-e^mined on the aspect of his wife. Therefore, invoh/ement of the ^iccused/appellant argued that the accused E|re brothers. fts the accused was unhappy h|is brought children ofthe deceased along quarrelling with Beko Kosa. When the fte attacked her also without intention to of^nce against the accused does not fravel ile I.PC. lelamed counsel for the State/respondent Court. case are that the accused was unhappy l^iat as to why he has brought 3 chiklren of that account there was quarrel. On the whereas, Tule Bai tried to intenrene in pie accused atlacked the deceased saying process, she sustained fatal injury and that Xi-HG—78 -fS^ ^i.tftvl^^f^^ &(«iWy 2-'^ MW^t *^11* sn^i qn R-ftch '?T«iTsn^T'sh+iicti Barve WI^ 200 sni?T'wra? C^^f^5'^) TOiTWHfeiail^l intention to cause her death. attacked the deceased with cli. <fti<iI<n<HTi 3i+i<nf ^felst <fai«ci< ^; StfilT 311^1 died. Therefore, from flie abo\te facts, it emerges that the prosecution has not been abte to establish that the accused attacked Tule Bai wtth -fowever, the manner in which the accused to on her head, tt can safely be inferred that the accused had knowledg^ tijiat by attacking the deceased with club on her head, he may likely to cau|se the death, therefore, oftence against the accused under Section 304 P^rttl of the I.P.C. is macte out Accordingly, conviGtion and sentence impo^ed upon the accused under Sectton 302 <rf the I.P.C. cannot be sustainedj app|eal In the resutt, the succeeds. ConvicUon and sen] of the I.P.C. are set aside, ins] 304 Part-11 of the I.P.C. and s] stated that the accused is in theaccused/appellant shall b6 period against the sentence im| Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge filed by the accused/appellant partly ijtence imposed upon him under Section 302 tead thereof, he is convteted under Sedion ^ntenced to undeigo R.l. for 8 years. It is d^tBntion since 2-7-2000 till today, therefore, entitled for setoff fbr the above detention i|)osed upon him. ——— Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge nl • • i