XI—HC—78 WW,W,W mm .nouo.oooo..c.o...o.. . mg. NO. év5/2ool mm<w§w> mmm WWW mmm mm§mm %531%Irtm%$ DE hUN IILL 3w L L liiiAJJUU AA!) HHN’BI F QR RT DT—HRFNT‘IRA NITQH‘RA IT L'mmlmll Appeai ND. 045/2: ’Ul : ‘ , sancieo V €YSHS Appallant State ol Cliilattisgm‘h ‘ RSS1) OIlCl€ni ' ’ Sim' Suresh P‘andey, Advocate for the appsllant. 8111i UNS. D60,’Add1. Pubiic Prosecumr for tiw Stata. U R A u Juuuwuwl (U v ‘A"‘ 11 700K\ ‘‘‘.. z 1161‘ LuU. 11ad0G. J Appsllant sanctao has prererred 1111s appaal quasnomng ms iagamy and com'ectneSS of tha judgmant of conviction and oréer of sentencs dated Zl-j-LLUU1 paSS€d by U16 i621111€€l 5€SSlOn$ Ju(l§;f-, 5aSt31' at Jagdalplll‘ 1n SSSSIOIXS ll‘lal NO. Z40f99 Whorobv 1116 lcmned 'Sossiom :Tucigs after holding accusad-appsuam gmltv for commi$sion of offence punighable undar Saction 302 of EEC, santencecl him to unaorgo imprisonment for Life. RT.O. van \ -N0 oo..oo.o Wm mm(W) e éLp 5" mu} ’ :20‘0 WWW WWW mmmm 2 'mWwa‘fffWW éswm VI ‘J. i Caw ofthe pl‘OSec’ution in brief was that 0n 1-5-1999 some quan'ai took piace betwésn Somnath- son of the accusad Sahdeo and Gudc‘iu— son of the deceased Mahddeo in connection with plucking of mango. Sonadei intervened and separated iham and sha informer} (hnash abom 1993 aweout 7.00 am. Ganesh aiongl to the house of Jadunath for conveying Panchavat. Accxised Sahdeo wa$ aheadv ,sitting in the house ofJadunath. When deceased Mahadeo infonned Jadunath about « ma mciasnt and said {hat F’anchaya: 'b‘amléo took out a knife frOm thy“ atti' neoh and he ran away: The deceased :uccum‘hed to the injuries on the spot. At about 1 LOU am: tha mattsr was mported td ”tam b’ub inspector Komai Sahu registered a First information Report Ex. P-i and left tor the scene of occ‘urrenre. After giving notice to the F'anchac vide Annéxura 13-15, 116 prepm‘sd rhe inquas body was sent for post mortem examination to Hospitai, Bhanpur Where Dr. KS. 'r’angra conducted post mortem and prepared the post mortem report Ex. P—S. He oprned that the cause of death Was sho 3h due to excessive hieeding and the death was homicidal in nature. Duiing poiice custody, the accused gave memorandum Ex P-2 ‘ under t$ection 2'7 of the Evidence Act \ I ; i l y I E X f Q"‘:’r i I k e r the incident. On the next day'i‘e. on ’2‘“ Mav Wtth his uncie Mahadeo (since deceased) went W111 be oonvened; on hearing this, accusseci e and attacked Mahadeo with the knife on his the Poiice Station, Bhanpuri 17V Ganesh Where 't repon' EX. P-i4 of the hodv of Mahadeo. The and m pursuance of that, he got recovered the P.T.O. wk . WW,WE,W (ugND. aqr/mar XI-HC-78 nono~ow...co.oo~o..oo WW (13W) WWWW %Wmm i E mwm ’WW#WW 3 ‘ ‘ %3I%W3TI%N ‘ the \accused in the: Coun of Chief iudicial Magisiram, Jagda‘lpur who in mm ‘ r 3. The prosccution 1'11 ordef to esmbiish {m charge against me accused exammed ’4‘? 3 Witnesses. The statement of the ace iseci was recorfled under Section 313 0t ULRU. evidence and stated that the deceased attacked him in. front of the Paneliayat. He dict not commit murder of Mahadeo; All the Viliagers are 11awng ammosuy agamst 111m . and; in the night they were sitting ne tr his house. They were holding axe and clubs. He examined '3 Witnesses namelV iaiman, Marlgii Bai and Sudm in his defence. The after hearing the arguments of the counsei for reSpective ieamed Sessmns Judge parttes and perusal ol the recorc‘i, con‘ Iieted and sentenced the accused-appellant. m which the accusad denieé the ma:e1'iai appearing against him in the prosecutmn x a 3r. V6 ha“? h€afd »e appeilant and S1111 LLN. Shri SuresiP Pandey, 1eamed counsel on behalf of the Siam. not c‘tisputed the fact of homicidal death of Mahadeo. Apart ' ta. Sim t’anaey has from that. from the evidence of P77. 1 Ganesh. RW. ‘2 Jadunath and medical ‘3 Deo, teamed Add‘t. Puhiic ?rosecutor on benaii of the st Pro. committed the case to the Sessmns Ju ge, Jagctalpur. ' knife under EX. P-3. After completion of imiestigation, charge sheet was filed agamst XI-HC-78 mm o.oo¢.oo.o.o. 3am,m1€,mgt . Cr, A, yqb £“$>/C>l oo..oooo a 200 WW(W)> :mwm‘w ‘a‘mmm § mwm L1. WW§WW éamw is estabiisimd that the (team or Mahacwc waS é‘ddsnce of P.‘ 7. b 1x3 Emma, at hdmicidai 1n naturé. 6.1 So far as invoivement arms concsmé'd: M1: Pandéy arguad thatt $t‘ or pmparation and tins accused attacked m6 passion' Without any prsmwnation {iacsaSvsd oniy onca, therefor; the 01 A $ection 304 Fart u qi l.k’.C. i. Deo suppoma the Judgmam or t1‘1a1 noun. '/ .‘ Un U16 omm‘ 112mm lVhi. U.N.f gumont advanced by the iaamod couniéel tor the g. in orc‘ler to appreaiate the al'; TESp€CliV€ 1)£1111€S, W’a DEIVE 136111S6\ i tho racord. RW. 1 GancSh has catogorically a1~>peiiant m cammission 0t 6mm: m quesmm 1s 36 incidmt happsnad all of a sucidm in a heat oi ‘"encs against [he accused c1065 not travel bayond t stamd that on the previous day, son of tho deceasod and tho son of tho accused quarreled Whiie thev were pinching mangoes. $onadei intervened and separated them. Somnath miormed his tame Sonadei. 1n the mommg Manadeo Sahdeo W213 already 313mg. Sandeo anam and attacked the deceased on the snot. the matter was reported to the poiice under EX. P-‘iv The evidence 0t 1’. W. the RW. 'Z Jadunath who has Stated that he 1s a l UHnESh haS D66“ COITODOTMBCI by l 1 1‘ Sahdeo on which, Sahdeo gave heating to went to the house ot Jadunath Where accused took out the knife which was covered under the dis neck. Mahadeo succumbed to the mJuries on P.T.O. XI—HC-78 3am,mna W Nuwy/ QDO‘ 111 2-00 Wm (W) . 6i-@r WW ‘mamm ‘ lawmamim : WWW mwffwm f énn’%nan%31 9. Coming to the point as To “homer tho act of the accused is covm‘xad uncier iixcoption 4 to Saction 300 of 13C. it is to bf: secn that tho act of the accused must be Without pi‘emeditation in‘a sucic‘ten fight; in the heat of a passion upon a sudden quartet and Without the offenders having taken undue advantage or acted in a cmei or unusuzu manner. If we examine ti‘e evidence available on record, on the previous (my, tnc son of the accused and the >on of the doc-cased quan‘eiec‘t and in that respcct some Panchayat was convened. but the accused did not attend the Panchavat. On the ncxt day morning, the dcccasctt Wcnt to thc housc of Jadunath whom thc accusct‘t was f g _ f ~ X x . Mémaaao on his mack with a knifq as a rasuit of which. Mahadeo succumbed m ths mjl‘ms '. k’. WA Ur. 1&5. Paikra has stawd that he conciucted in: p'bst monem on tha hodgm’; Mahadco on 2““ May 1999‘ There was incised wound (m the neck in the size . the mjuiy was sunimcnt in ordinaiy course of nature for causing death. DI .i v4 x 2 The. caéss of daath-was sxceasive Needing on account of cutting of army and hiss o Io1501T is 11X. P0. 11161‘6i‘01‘6, 1t 1S €stabiished Mahaéeo (iiod as a resuh of injury mmctect by the accused with knit: anti the same has heen estahiished by the evmance oi w1tnssses HAW. 1 Ganesh PW. ‘2 Jadunath and mcciicai ovidmcs of , AV. 3 Ur. IxS Failn‘a. ‘ , ) P.T.O. ' \fluage Fatei and on m6 fatefui day, . iahadao and Gamsh came- to his housa in tins \ wi‘ly momjng and thay staned qunrreiiing and in that process, Sahdao attacked 9’? . a XI—HC-78 Q HW, mfWw o 5f. grin. (”y/zoo) mm..o.~ooo‘oo...~.bo$o§ a1 200 wm (W) maam WWW mwm G WW§WW égwm . an‘eany Sitting and there, as per the evidence of Jadunath, quan‘ei started and in that pmcess, the accused took out a knife which was covered under the shawi and attacked the deceased on his neck. RW. i Ganesh has stated that the accused was roaming m tné mgm canyhng arrow i1 his hand and on the next éiay what: Mahadvao wamt‘g the 1106136 of Jadunath, i‘he ac :used was ah‘éadv thaw having knifé Wim him covm‘ecl wHh the shawi and tha acuusm‘l Sahc‘lso anackad Mahadeo in his mach“. iilsl‘rsfém this conéuct of rha acouwfi shoxw that the accused want to the housa of . .taaunam with pivparationcamying kaifs with him and RW. 1 Ganssh has hmher Siatéa that aftar mesh/mg {11.6 injury: E/iahadao gtamad miming, wan than the accused chased him and when Manadao fall (n dead. This conduct shows that'the (ieeeased was armiess, therefore, the pmsec-utmn shows that iha case of {1‘ §ection 360 ‘of LPC. Therefore. We Juaigment ol the trial Conn and the ap‘aeai is devoid of merit. the same is habie to he dismissed and it is hereby (iismissed. Sdl— L , L.C.BHADOO Judge ‘ ¢ Wn, the accused ieft the scene saying that he is accused. went with preparation Whereas the conduct 01' the accused as per the evidence of e accused does not fail under Exception 4 to (10 liot Ima any iliegaiity or infnmity in the Sd/— DHIRENDRA msm'gi if Judge P.T.O.