XI-HC~78 mm Hi 200/ WmRaiaW) m asrféaia; WWW mmwm WW§fFdTW aEafwTnm nrrnLmKKT KL§P i T i1? fimf‘bie Hen’blg 2i-3—2007 Snn Abhay Shri D. K. Argmments Grail Judgment §er L.C.Ehadoo, Thisappeai order of sentence 1Eudge, buaepur 'iearned Additmnai accused} appeiiallt' 302 of the EPC, rjay a fnle of undergo RI. fer Case of the 3.3.2000 after Parmhu @- Panchram cccurrence. At that Hospital was called Budiu: 2 yea Bax ga(n State iir L 3i _‘Luama4¢u1 wai‘f&,715CCI ab cut s Dec 1 tier ‘MzStn , R’o vmagc F S H r1 Dmtt bnagpux Vets Js 0f Chhattisgarh C‘. Bhadoo and rgndm Mishrai LT AdVmate for tha appe‘flant advor‘é‘te, f“ ‘hPrPSperden- Lats on dais. against the judgment' of convictioxi aild LZOUI passed by 4"“ edditional Sessions btFsSions Trial lie. 1937i 2000, Whexeby the 310113 Judge after holding the c0mmiS$ion of OEence under Sectirm to undergo imprisonment for life and hl default 01" nayment 0f dne t0 further in brief, i3 that at abeut 10.30 a.m. on ‘cries 0f Dropadibai, SahadraBai (PW—5), and ather peraons arrived at the piace of A.R.Ba11iare {?W— 1 I} posted in the Govt. enquired from Dropadihai; on which she ML Db. Tiwari, Gwalre, Gem Heard. dictattk‘i J is directed dated 2U. (b ) m Ses guilty fcrr sentenced 11' Rs.2000f -, cne year. prosecutiqn, hearing the VFW-9) time Dr, and he ( P.T.O. Xi-HC—78 mm,m,m ”WWI93?) . . / an; 200/ Wm<m> WWW WWW WW WW égwm -1— wwwm raphed tnat smce her husband wag doubtlng ner ndehw, on that grcund alter pourmg Kerosane on hm body he na$ set her on me 1n aduram (PW—6), Kotwar Shyamclas (EW-S) etc. D1". AR Banjare (FW—l 1] recordeci the dying declaration (ExPi 9) 6f Smt. Dropadibai. Dropadibai wae gent to Govt. Hospital, Bilaspur where she succumbed to the burn injuries at about 3.30 a.n1. Merg registered at City Kotwali, Bilaspur. the presence of Witnesses E intimation (EX.P} 12‘} was inquest (EX.PI 2) was prepared on the ‘body of Dropadibai. 'Fostmortem on the body of Dropadibai was conducted by Dr. Manoj Jaiswal (PW— 16) and Dr (Smti) Batham and they prepared the postmortem report (Exfi ”5) in which the Body of Dropadibai was They opined that cause of death was excessive The papers were sent to the Fohce 3tation Hixri by City Kotw’aii Bilaspur on which merg intimation {Ex'f’i 13} was reduced into wrmng Based on the dying deelaiation 'burn and as a result of shock. First Information Report (EX Pi 1b} was regstered investigating omcer left for the scene found 100% burnt. of occurrence, took: into possession one i burnt clothes of Dropaoibai Le. sari, pettrcoat blouse the matohsncxs, plastic necklace etc. were seized under LX.P[ 4. He took into possession one sed with burnt Isleeves under Ex.?[5. plastic 1erK1n containing kerosene under Ex Pf ” trioot shirt of the acou Assistant Sub-inspector T. R. Goutam prepared the site plan (EXFI '7). The Another site plan {EXP} i4) was prepared by ?atwari Halka. burnt clothes were sent for examinatron to L bagai from Where report (Ex.Pj 19) was received. The accused was arrested. After completion of investigatidn' charge sheet was filed in the Court of \‘\ Pro. XI—HC—78 WK'2‘00/ WWEMVW m wm a ‘ m%wm Judicial Magistrate First Class, Biiaspur who in thrn committed the Qase to the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur from Where 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur received the case on tra11$fer for trial. 1‘3‘rnsecuti011, in orde: to estabh'sh the charge agajiist the accusedi appeilant examinewi 18 Witnesses. Statement of the accusea was recorded under Section 3i3 of the CLRC. in which he deniec1 the circumstances appearing against him in the prdsecution evitience mid stated that he is innocem aim has been falsely implicated in the Crm6. Learned Additionai S‘essions Judge after hearing counsei for the reapective parties convicted and sentenced the accused as aforementioned. We have heard MI. Ahhay Ti'wari, 1earned counsel appearing on behalf of the accusedjappe‘llant and Mr. D.‘K.Gwa]re, iearned Dy. GA. for the Statef respondent. WV~16 Dr. Manoj Jaiswal has stated on 3.3.2000 he was \ working in the Govt. Hos ital, Biiaspur where he along with Dr. {SmtJ Batham conducted p stmortem on the body of Dropadibai and noticed that the body was burnt up to i00°/£). Therefore, in View of above medical widence d postmortem report (EKPI i5), it is established that Dropadi'b succumbed to the burn injuries. . \ \ Rs far as involvem 1t of the accusedf appellant in setting \\—)ropadibai on fire is concer ed, Mr. Abhay T‘iwari argued that as per P.T.O. t i Xl-HC—78 ne evidence of Er. Manoj Jaiswai (PW— 16) the liody 0i Uropadibai was 100% burnt and he has stated in his; evidexice: that in such a eondi‘lion it was not possible for her‘to put her tihumb impression. Therefore, the dying declax in order-to appreciaie the argument of 1ear1ieti (261111361 for the accusedf appeilallt, We have perused the evidence ¢f Dr. AR. Banjare (PW-i 1) who has stated th axgaon M at about 11 00 to 1 1 30 am 1 one RaJeev invan came t0 mm and burnt, therefore, he Went to the house 01" accused where he saw that Dropadibai was writhing in pain on account 0f burn injuries 51 Dropadibai was crying tha, run away. Numbér of per: of Dropadibaiwas precarit 7 and other villagers, he reo in which sne has stated u her husband bodhiam bahu pouted Kerosene on her body and set ioubtmg her ndeuty. bhe also stated that incident, he quarr'eled With her The doctor ne of giving this statement, she was fuliy declaration was recorded at 11.55 in the :cused Bodhram, which hears his signature and Dropadibai put her thumb impression on the same. However, in his witness, no suggestion was gven to him 1’ itirm (Ex.Pf 9) becomes doubtful. at on .5 3 2000 ne was worKmg as a doctm in Primary Health Centel the village Sarpanch arr informed thatone 1ady has istained by her. He has further stated that t hex husband. after setting her on fire has mus were standing there. As the condition :us, therefore, on being asked by Sarpanch orded the dying declaration of Dropadibai iat at about 10 00 to i030 in the morning her on nre since he was i even 5—6 days prior to the has stated that at the ti] conscious and the dying morning in the house of at i the cross—examination of t I ’ ’“P.T.O.‘ ‘ f XI-HC—78 a WW OX&% as to Whethar it §was pasaibie for Dropadibai tq put her thumb impression 011 anyi document “mile she was 100% b rnt. Fw banodia jial has stated that she is resi ' g in a separate house, Dropadlbalg was hea sister-in—law, Wife of cl er brother of her husband. In the morning szhe was providing footi £0 her children, at that time hearing the commotion she came out in the street and saw that Dropadibai was lying in a cot in the courtyard ! f her house. She y Went near the Qiot and saw that her whoie hody was burnt, Dropatiibai asked éher to provide her water, on which she enquired from Dropadi‘bai “:fhereupoa Dropadibai discioSed that her husband has set her on iirie. She has further stated that§her father—in—iaw namely JaKnlalam was a1 o there and the doctor ‘1lvas caheol. r’W o fjaduram has also stated ' at body ot Dlopadlbal Swas burnt and 1n Ens presence U1 bamare 11W 11) 1ecorded the dyhlg decimation ol Dropadmai 1n Which she s stated that her hus band has set her on whatever she was tallhng, was reduced into writing by the doctor. in the cross»exan1ina on he has stated that the doctor eniquired m Dropadibai as to h W she sustained ' thopadrbal was tattong the mstance of the doctor. 1t 1s incorrect to say at the doctor has her thumb impression on bX.E}9. W 8 Snyamdas hotwar 01 the x I i v 1. ,, . , . _ V. .,...,r.r.wh_r,n_._'nr>-.~-P.-T~.o:~» d o XI—HC—78 WW(W> mam WWW MWWW C village has stateti that Dr. E Dropadibai in his presence husband has set her on hle and the dying declaration is EX.P}9, which was recor ded as per t bears his signature from 'B’ corroborated the above evid evidence that Dropadibai m. Dr. Banjare {PW-11), no qr §ropadibai could put her th ciespite being burnt i00% (ieclaration made by Dropad law of Dropadibaj and the a Bropadibai on fire, the dying WW§WW‘ %31%1?3TI%¥T anjare recortied the dying declaration of and she disciosed to the doctor that her Mr. Tiwari, also argue as to how the dying declare police and placed on the rem in this colmection, P" paragraph 9 of his evidc application to Dr. Banjare, hnn Therefore, in view of ab i3 clear that the police too §Ex.Pi 9) from Dr. Baniare argument of learned cour respect has no substance. he statement given by Dropadibai, which to ‘B’ portion. PW—g Panchram has also ence. Thus, in View of the above ample ide the dying declaration (Ex.P/' 9) before estion was put to Dr. Banjare whether umb impression on the above document i- and also in View of the oral dying ubai before PW—5 Sahodra Bai, sister-in— ‘cused to the effect that accused has set declaration (EXPI 9) stands proved. i that there is nothing on record to show Ltion (Ex.F/’ 9) came in the possession of )rd. Ei-l8 TR. Goutam ELSJJ, RS. Hirri, in *nce has stated that after giving an i he obtained the dying declaration from ove evidence and the FER. of EX.P/ id, it k into possession the dying declaration r and placed it on record, as such the Lsel for the accused] appellant in this P.T.O. wwerfiwam nip-arm Card/300 1H 200/ XI—H—78 C ww,m,m Wm .W’.a:.l3$.nm m 200/ WW(W) mam : > WW%’WW A WWW mmwm 7 %Wm m1. Tiwaxi, fluLila—WWW dyillg declaration (EXPI' 9) Dr. Baniare (PW—i 1) has not gven any cart§cate to the effect that Dropadibai was in a f1t state of mind to give the .~§t, statement. Dr. Banjare has categ Jrically stated that Dropadibai was in a £t state of mind to give her statement and she was talking. Even ether witnesses nameiy PW-5 Sahodra Bai, PW-é Daduram, PW—S $hyamdas and PW—9 Panchra have aiso stated in their statements that Dropadibai was in a fit state bf mind t0 g‘ve the statement and in fact, she gave the statement, therefore, despite there being ample evidence on record regarding, fitness of mind of'Dropadibai to give statement, merely in the ab sence of any medical certiiicate in this regard, the dying declaration (EKPI 9) can not be disbelieved. Mr. Tiwari also argued that admittedly the house Where Dropadibai was burnt is sitltated in the thickly populated area but there ... ls . noting . on ‘ record n that . ‘ she raised . crises . and people came to , her rescue. This argument of learned counsel for the accused] appellant is ‘ contrary to the widence available on record as PW—S Sahodra Bai, sister-in-law of Dropadibai and the accused has categorically stated in her evidence that in the morning she was providing food to her children, at that time she heard the cries and came out and saw that Dropadibai was lying on the cot in a burnt condition in her house ‘\\and other villagers also came on the spot. Therefore, in View of the ¥\l __\ \ \\ P.T.0. WW,WW,F¢MTH3I WETm C/rA Ha 200/ WW(W) a&man% $ wma m%m$ 3wmKH%aaa$ ”b &DOVe eV1d€11C€, W6 31‘6 DI has been able to estabiish Dropadibai on fire after p011 WW%WW én%%ua&$ ' Apart from the abc invesiigating of!icer PW— ié seized the burnt cioihes of uf Dropadibai under EXP]: 0f the accused under EX.P[ ESL. smeil of kerosene explained by the ac cused a4 on hie shirt, the immlveme: stands establieheo‘l beyonri the dying declaration (EX.F oral dying declaration made before Sahodra Bai (PW-5) as also the other circumstantial evidence i.e. seizure of half burnt shirt of the accused from the place of occurrence, for which no explanation has been oEered by the accused, the trial Court has rightly convicted the accused] appellant for commission of murder of her Wife Dropadibai by setting her on fire. the considered opinion iiiat pr uaecution the involvement of the accused in setting ring kerosene on her body. we evidence, from the evidence of the i TR. Goutain who has stated that he Dropadibai, matchsticks, plastic necklace i and on 8.3.2000 he also seized the shirt 5, on which as per the report (EXEI 19} of oil was noticed, which has not been ; to how the smell of kerosene was present 1t of the accused in the crime in question reasonable doubt. Therefore, based on i9) made before Dr. Banjare (PW~1 l), the in the result, the ap'oeal being devoid of substance is liable to he dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- ere, sw— '2 DmENDRA MISHRA L.C. BHADOO i" ‘ Judge Judge RT.O.