W mm, m, m‘ m @ . .........éwgz/ ..................gi 2003 - Versus - RESPONDENT: {Crimina! cppaa! unde Division Bench: ‘ . Hon‘ble Mr. LC. Bhadoo and ‘Hon'bla Mr. T.P. sharma, JJ'. 27-2-2008 MwU‘l’j'am Pandey, caunsel ' Mr. Praveen Dasi Depufy 6c Om! Judgmenf dicfa‘red on I Ms. LC. Bhadoo J: - This appeal is direcfed againsf senfence dated 30-11-2002 passe Dis‘H'. burg in Sessions Trig! No.24 Judge affer hoiding fhe accused/:appeiiani guil‘i’y for commission of offence :enfenced him fo undergo imprisonment for in defauif of paymem‘ of fine io fur‘iher undergo RI. for Three nionfhs, for under 5ec+ion 302 of fhe IPCV s , iife anti pay a fine of Rs.1,0QO/-, S/o Shri Ram Dayal 60nd, R/o ViHage Scrar‘, P.5. Gurur, DIS'H'. Durg @hha‘r‘risgarh) Sfafe of Chhuffisgarh r- Section 374 (2) of fhe Cr.P.C.} \ =ar- fhe ainpeilan‘t. vf. Advocafe for- fhe Shh/respondent fhe judgmznf of conviction and order of d byihe Additional Sessions Judge: Baiod, 9/2001 whereby learned Addii‘ionai Sessions commiffing ihe murder of his wife nameiy, W Via; (W) mm . gmWm WWW ifgeiW $ aim 31W APPELLA NT: Lokesh Kumor, (In Jaii) aged aboui 25 years, (5%.2/ W m 111 2003 mam (13W) WWW ammm wwwiffgérm $aifa=ralé¥r WWW 5onkunwar. However, learned Addir'ionm Sessions Judge acqui‘Hed the accused of offence under Sec‘rion 201 of fh I.P.C. Case of 141a prosecufion, in bri is Thaf 5onkunwar’ (since deceased) was married f0 The accused/appellanf on e-E-ZQOL The accu$ed married ?he deceased on ‘E‘he condi‘l‘ion fha‘t he wi” remain wifh his wife a'l' in-‘aw‘s house. Af‘!‘er marriage, 9n 7-5—2001, Sank nwar was faker! fo Jore‘i‘arai from where on 11-5—2001, The accused fook her 1- his viilage Sorar. in befween, in a joviai manner, Sonkunwar asked fhe accu ed as ‘Lamsend which was no? iiked by ihe accused and on fhai count only on 2—5-2001, when The accused lefi‘ fhe house of his friend izohii 5chu m‘ village ahmr-a and while refurning To Jorafaraii on fhe wayLa'r' abouf 7.45 p.m. he commiifed 1'he mkirder of Sonkunwar by affaeking wiih a knife. Knife, e weapon of offence, and anklef were concealed under fhe Beshram bu Thereoffer, ‘ihe accused self—inflicted injury with sione in order io show “l m‘ he has been a'H-acked. The accused was Taken io Dhamfari hospi'ial. On coming +0 know aboui fhe dead body of Sonkunwar, Pusauram (PW-1) gave merg infimafion EXP—1 #o Police 5fa+ion $alod and based on 'ihaf, firsf info mafion repor‘i EXP-19 was regisfered. The Inves‘i'igaiing Officer lef‘l for the scene of occurrence and preoared inquesf EXP-2 on ihe body of Sonkunwar. He prepared sife plan EXP-4. He seized eigh? broken pieces of bangles, blo dsiained soil a plain soil from the place of occur-reance, one pair of plasfic Cha all one golden ear ring and one cycle under ' EXP-3 Panchnama (EXP—5) of fhe bicycle was prepared. Body of Sonkunwar was sem‘ for ‘posf-morfem examina ion +0 Primary Heal‘ih Cem‘re, Balod where l H ,M w a awareiciceewm we i o4 ”amen e , h s , Hmmm WW %¢W §ia‘1%m‘srl%¥l 31{ Dr. BL Rafre {Xq Dr. GD. Baghel (P -5) canduc‘red poSf—mor-‘l-em and oyined fhaf causa of dee?h was syncope as resuif of cardiac arres+ due 1'0 excessiva haemarrhage due ‘fo injury 1'0 Ief carofid arfery and dea'l'h was homicidal in nafure‘ Thay prepared posf—mor 7m repor‘i Ex.P—6. Whiie in police cusfody; i'he amused gave memorandum Ex P-13 and in pursuance of Tha‘r, bioods‘mined knife, weapon of offence & bloods ained silver- ankief were seized under Ex?— 14 fmm aeshr‘am bush. One bigod mined sione Was also seized from fhe place of occurrence under EXP-14. \Sei ed ariicies were sen‘i fo Forensic Science Lobom‘iory, Roipur under EXP-23 and reports Exs.P-24 & 25 were received from fhere. Affer complefion of invesfigm‘ion charge shee‘r was ¥iied in fhe Cour‘i of Judicial Magisfrai‘e, Bolod who in turn eommi‘H’ed fi‘ie case +0 ihe $essions Judge, burg, from where iearned ddi'i'iond Sessions Judge, Balod€ received i'he ease on Transfer for +rial. The grosecufion, in order ‘io esmb ish charges ogains'i' fhe accused, examined 17 wii'nesses. Smiemeni‘ of fhe a cused was recorded under Section 313 of fine Cr.P.C. in which fhe accused d nied ihe ma‘ieriai appearing ogainsi’ him in The prosecufion evidence. Learned Addi‘iional Sessions Jud e offer hearing counse! for respective porfies‘ convici'ed and senfenced in accused as aforementioned. Praveen Dos, {earned Depm'y émvf. Advoca'fe on behaif of fha Sfai'e/ respondent. \ M the oufset Mr. Pandey has n01 dispu‘red +he homicida! dea+h of Sonkunwmt Moreover, Dr. 9D. Baghe! (PW—5) has smfed Thaf on 13-5-2001 he was working as Medica! Officér in Communiw‘ Heah‘h Cenfre; Balod, on fha? day, on fhe reques‘r pf Poiice Sfafion: Bcfod‘ he conducfed posf—mor'fem on fhe body of $onkunwar. There were (i) a‘smRwound in fhe size of 1.5 cms. x 0.5 cmsu 4 gems. deep on lefi' side of neck near +hyroid cariilage, direc‘l’ion of fhe injury was from buyer “r0 upgvard, cam1’id orfery was cu? fransver-sely; (ii) one incised wound on upper par‘r of neck in rig 1‘ side of fhyroid£on+i§a9e which was oblique in nowre in The size of 2 ems. x cm skin deep; (iii) three abrasions on lef? , side of neck; (iv) +hree injuries o chin: (v) one abrasion on lef‘i hand and (vi) one abrasion on lefl heel. All fhe njuries were onfe-morlem in nalure. injury x No.1 was caused by painled weap n, injury No.2 by sharp edged weapon and injuries No.3 & 4 wi‘rh plain obje f. Injury No.1 was fowl and sufficiem‘ fo cause deafh. Cause of deafh was syncope as o resuh‘ of injuries on neck and cuiiing of camiid orier'y‘ Death ‘ as homicidal innaiure. His repori is EXP-6. In View of fhe above evidence, if s established 'ihai‘ fhe deoi'h of Sonkunwor was homicidal in nmur'e. 4 As far as complicify of he accused in fhe crime in quesiion is concerned, in this case, There is o direci‘ or- ocular' evidence To conned: ‘ihe accused wiihl ihe crime in quesii . Whole case resis on fhe circumsmn'rial 3n?“ m W' a,“ mm ’ mm?Wm mm wW am’mm é‘ W2 have heard Mr. Uttcm Panda learned counsal for The appellant and HW,W,W Q’f evidence. As per The seffkd law, circumsfanfial evidence, 1‘he Ag £hat+er3eg vs. 5m1'e of W.B. {( “In a case based circumsfances frcm wh drawn have nof anly 1'0 fhe drcumsfances so es ablished shouid be of a conclusive namre and consisfem‘ o ly wifh fhe hypc+hesis of flue guiif of The accused. Thosg c cumS'i'ances shouid no’r be capable ofher hypofhesis excepf fhe guiif Ehain of The evidence musf be so any reaSonable ground for fhe of being explained by d of fine accused andd‘he comple're as no? To !e belief consisi'enf wi‘ih “he innocence of ihe accused. I’r needs no reminder ‘i‘ha‘f ’of convicTion and The more serious The crime, The greaTer n To scruTinize The evidence lesT of proof.” in order To convicT an accused based on The ex CourT in The maTTer of Dhononjoy 4) 2 $CC 320} held That: circumsfunfial evidence, fine 'i‘he conciusicn of guii‘i is 1‘0 be fully esi’abiished buf also fha‘i all a legally esfablished circumsfances and no? merely indignai‘ion of The courT canjonm The basis should be The car-e Tak< suspicion Takes The place The. prosecu‘rion has Tried To circumsTances: - (i) The deceased was losT see deoThi (ii) Weapon of offence knife & seized aT The insTc-nce of The (iii) Injury found on The body of FirsT cifcumsmnce .7 Moreover, RohiT Kurnar’Sohu (PW-4) has This circumstance is noT in dispuT sTaTed in his evidence ThaT one day The accused came wiTh his wife To his house silver ankleT, boTh sTained wiTh’ blood, were : accused. The accused can be self-inflicTed. esTabiish The crime on The foliowing ‘ n alive wiTh The accused JusT before her i e 9 n h W m G2 A. “i 200 3 Win-am (W) m§g . mmm mmifw emmm WW, WW,W .6 6A2. Wm H‘L 2003 mam (W) mmfzaw Harmamia? mmm WW§WW éa‘sifanm \XV 10. EXP—14. Police had no? enquired fi was no‘l‘ effec‘l'ed in his presence. Devar Singh (PW-17) has sfaf 11.7. - memorandum EXP—13 in his presen effecfed from Beshram bush ai 1 s‘i'ai-ed fhai af ihai‘ Time, he along ‘l‘hey came a'i‘ abou‘i 2—3 9m. and fh e ' KC, Kadam (PW—14) has sfafed in 25 pm. he fpck fhe accusad in? whi§e going To his in—law's house, bra‘l'her informed him he came h: ie'f‘!‘ his house a? ubouf 6—7 pm. Lokesh has been murdered Fmm ‘ fhai‘ fhe accused and fhe decease‘ pm. for going 1'0 fhe viHage of dec » wife of Lokesh was murdere¢ $acmd circumshnce ,As far as recovery of knife and silver anklei‘ is concerned, Rajauram (PW—9) has rf fhe village. He has sfafed in his evidence ichayaf, they inforlrn’ed him iha‘l' they have py have prepared fhe paper's, +hereforea he fumed hostile. He was Sarpanch < fhaf Paijge peopie came in flne Pa! enquired from *he accused and fh: a1- ?ha‘r time he was no‘l' uf house, when his his house and fhe accused & fhe deceased \!ex1' day he came #a know fha‘!‘ +he wife cf 'he evidence af fhis wifness, if is esfabiished i ief‘r fogefher‘ from his house ai' abauf 6-7 eased Sonkunwar and on the way, Sonkunwar shauld sign, thaf is why he signed memorandum EXP-13 and recovery memo on’n +he accused in his presence or recovery in his evidence ihaf fhe accused gave e and recovery of silver anklef & knife was insfance of fhe accused. He has furfher fh Rajauram was presenf in ‘rhe Panchayaf, payers were prepared in ihe Panchayaf. s evidence fhaf on 18—5-2001 a'r aboui 12- his custody and during invesiigai'ion he L E‘iii‘ ' i ' i e i § ;!1é; )G-HC—478 In 200,”: mm (13W) 3mg; . ._ mmm madam f3‘i1m ammanasr recorded memorandum EXP—13 regarding silver ankle‘r & knife, same were recovered from Beshram bush of 'he instance of ‘rhe. accused and siezed under EXP-44. x Whereas, MR Naik (PW-13),>anoi'her Inves'iiga'i‘ing Officer, has sta‘i‘ed in his evidence fha‘i he fook ‘i'he accused in'i‘o cus‘i'ody on 14-5—2001 and his ciofhes were seized. If fhe evidence of ail 'rhe above‘ ‘qur wi‘inesses (PWs 9, 17, 14 & 13) i3 +aken foge‘iher and scruiinized careful in ihe firsf ins‘rance, Rajauram (PW-9) has ‘inof supporfed the prosecufion c e. Devar Sinah (PW-17) even ‘i'hough has sfafed fhaf ihe accused gave me orandum Ex P—13 and recovery EXP 14 was Police came along wrl'h Qqjaurarn m +he Panchaval‘ a‘i' aboui' 2 p m wher seizure memo EXP 14 was prepared ai- 1 15 p m and memorandum Ex P-13 was prepared ai' 12 3O pm Moreover seizure memo EX.P«3 shows flaw one gold n ear ring (J‘humka) was seized from fhe place of oecurrence. When gol en ear ring was found a? ihe place of occurrence where was +he occasio for ‘ihe accused 'io fake silver ankle? and ‘ get ii‘ concealed under Beshram bu h. As per i'he evidence of MR. Naik (PW- in'l'o cusfody on 14—5-2001, whereas KC. Kadam (PW-14) has s‘ia‘ied fha‘l' fh accused was Taken info police cusiody on 1&5—2001. Rqjauram (PW-9) has of supporfed fhe prosecufion case. 'ihese ' faci'orsccreafe reasonable doub‘l' o +he recovery made a‘i ihe insfance of i'he accused. Moreover, even +hough, per ihe F.S.L. report, blood was found on knife & silverl‘anklei', buf fhere is n serologisf reporf fhaf fhe biood found on effected bui‘ he has sfafed ih e 13): +he accused was already Tak ! EW? la - V 4 @ mm,m,m z g7 .Iet‘l/ gi 2003 was m (W) WWW "these 1mm arficles are of We alood group of fhe deceased. Blood group e1 because whole case res‘rs on fhe recuver‘y 0f *hese arficles, fa connecf fhe uccmed wifh fhe crime in quesfion‘ There is no evidence Tha‘r The ankiej' WV. parade has been conducfed. In fhe circumsi‘anees, on the basis of above recovery of knife & ankie‘i‘, ihe accused canno‘i be conneci'ed wi‘ih 'i'he crime in ques‘iion. \ Thirt! cimumsmnce \ \During ‘I'r‘iall defence of fhe accu: ‘wife. Sonkunwar- were going on fhz fhey commiffed the murder of S‘ from #hére, he was *aken +0 fhe iaeerai-ed wounds were no‘i'iced on Advoeafe appearing on behalf of f si'ai‘ed fhoi‘ ‘ihose injuries can be s lf-infiici’ed. Mereiy on ‘ihe ground Thai ihe ries eon be self-infiici-ed defence of 'ihe ere Is no ofher cogenf clear and cimehmg he accused In a criminai case, fhe accused is r quired i'o probahiiise The defence taken by him and if is 'ihe duty of fhe prosec fion +9 esfabiieh crime againsf ihe accused beyond‘reasonabie doubt Case of The prosecution is fhat when fhe accused e house of fhe deceased, on the way! fhe deceased] in q Joviai manner, oske WWifE‘ZWW $3if‘ana1éw bacomas more reievanf in fhis ca; deceased and no iden'l'ificafion ich was seized und\er‘ Ex.P—14 was of the ted was fhd‘r in fact. when he along wh‘h his way, mo persons mef fhem on motorcycie, kmkunwar and infiicied injuries on him aiso, hospii'al where he was examined and eimple is head. Argumen‘!’ of learned Deputy Govt e, Sfate/respondenf is fha‘i fhe doc‘i'or has dacfor has sim‘ed ihm‘ fhose inJ‘ accused cannoi be ruied our as f emdence i0 esfabhsh crime agams'i ‘ awfwi’wwv—r» +he accused as ‘Lamsend i.e. Ghar Jamai, hand the deceased were going fo f ma W W WW fhat enraged fhe accused and he mm‘eriai an record 1‘0 es'l'ablish Thi: accused as ‘Lamsend and on fhaf co‘ +he contrary, Rohi‘l‘ Kumar' Sahu (PV fhe deceasad and fhe accused sfay sfa‘fed *hai‘ bofh were happy, o?iocked fhe deceased. Bui' there is no i fad fha‘i’ in fact 'ihe deceased asked The inf the accused affocked fhe deceased. On V-4), friend of fhe accused a1- whose house ‘ed for some fime before i'he incidem‘, has No evidence has been adduced by the prosecution fhai' afier marriagekan fill fhe da‘I‘e of incident in beiween seven days, iherewas any sfrain relation ip befween fhe accused and the deceased, Therefore: no mo‘i‘ive has been pr ed by The prosecuiion. Even fhough if is very difficult to estabiish motivei same remains in the mind of the‘criminol, buf if mafive is proved fhen if pl a vifai role in ihe case of circumsfanfiai evidence. ~Exce‘pt recovery of arti es, there is no other evidence against the oecused to establish the crime. A has been held above, recovery of articles has no? been proved beyond reason The considered opinion Tha‘r convicfit I.P.C. cannof be susiained. In The resuH, The appeal succeeds senfences imposed upon fhe accuse aside and he is acquMed of fhe said detention since 18"“ May, 2001. He ie doubt In fhe circumsfances, we are of in of the accused under Seci-ion 302 of The and ihe some is allowed. Conviction and d under Seci’ioh 302 of +he I.P.C. are se‘i charge. I'l- is sfafed tho? the accused is in 2e sei a? liberfy forlhwi'l'h, if nol‘ required any o+her case. . s - :L s c.BHADoo “l J1, . sly. TP SHARMA Judge \ l " Judge Som: i l" V: 7 ‘ \