m 20m . CYPrNOQQiR D.B.: - Hon’ble Shri LC Biiadoo & Hon’ble Shn Sunll t 24-7-2007:- Shri Sachin Singh Ra Shri Satish Gupta, respondent. Oral judgment dictate 1 on Dais. L.C. Bhadoo, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment of‘conviction and order st, 2001 passed by the 4‘" Additional sessions No.477/2000 whereby learned Additional the accused/appellant guilty for commission 2 of the l.P.C., sentenced him to undergo \ \ i of sentence dated 14'“ Augu Judge, Bilaspur. in S.T. Sessions Judge after holdin of offence under $ection {umar Smha, JJ. iput, counsel for the appellant. Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State] WW (13W) m mW ammm m Hf‘aam $111M?W W"€Q°r Than £5 aifdtr W APPELLANT: Dukhuram Sahu @ Bendram Sahu, aged 42 years, S/o Bisahu Ram Sahu, Rlo village Karan Kapa, Presently Rlo Chulghat Road, Takhatpur. Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (CG) -Versus- RESPONDENT: State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Takhatpur. Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.). (Criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C.) XI-HC—78 WW m 209 mm (W) WWW ammésrm Wmiwm am’mm WWW imprisonment for life & to pay a line of Rs.1 ,000/-, in default of payment of tine to fulther undergo RJ. for 6 months. The case of the pros ution is that in the intervening night of 11/1 2- 9-2000 deceased Janki, ac used Dukhuram, their daughter PW-7 Lama, PW-8 Devi Kumar, PW-11 antram, father of the deceased, and PW-3 Dinesh Kumar were sieepin in the house of the accused on the ground in the same room after takingt eir dinner. In the night, the accused went out of the room saying that he i going to attend the call of nature. The door of the room was open, stree light and light of the shop in front of the room were on. The accused brou ht a stone and threw it on the head of Janki, as a result of which she su PW-8 Devi Kumar and PW taken to the Primary Health was lodged in the Police information Report EXP/16 under Section 307 of the l.P V.K. Soni (PW-1) examined injury report Ex.P/1. He re treatment, Janki succumbed Merg intimation Ex.P/5 was given to the City Kotwali, Bilaspur, which was sent under Ex.P/6 to the Poli ined injury which was seen by PW-7 Lalita, -11 Santram. Next day morning, Janki was Centre, Takhatpur. Dehati Nalishi EXP/15 Station Takhatpur. Based on that, First was registered for commission of offence C. Janki was taken to the hospitai where Dr. er injures and gave treatment. He prepared rred Janki to the Bilaspur Hospital. During to the head injury on 13-9-2000 at 6.30 a.m. :e Station Takhatput. The investigating ofti er left for the hospital. after giving notice EXP/8 to the Panchas, pr pared inquest EXP/9 on the body of the deceased. examination to the Assistan Surgeon, Dharam Hospital, Bilaspur under \ \ \ \ The body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem Xl-HC—78 WWW ammW Wmm Wama‘fiwm $affcma1é¥r EXP/11 where Dr. S.S. Bh: body of the deceased, prep: that cause of death was con in the police custody, the pursuance of that, stone, weapon of offence, was seized under EXP/1 9. The stone was sent for atia (PW-12) conducted post-modem on the ared postmortem report Ex.P/22 and opined Ia due to injuries sustained over head. While accused gave memorandum Ex.PI18, in examination to the Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Biias ur, who in tum, gave report EXP/23 and it was opined that injuries fo caused by the said stone. After compietion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused in the Court of t udicial Magistrate, 1“ Class, Bilaspur, who in turn committed the case to: the sessions Judge, Bilaspur, from where learned Additional Sessions Judge received the case on transfer for trial. order to establish the charge against the The prosecution in accused examined 12 witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the C nd on the head of the deceased could be .P.C. in which he denied material appearing against him in the prosecu ion evidence and stated that he has been falsely implicated at the beh tof Ramswaroop and Bhagwan Singh. After hearing leamed counsel for the respective parties, leamed Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. We have heard Shri achin Singh Rajput, counsel for the appellant and Shri Satish Gupta, Dep Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. Wm in 200 mm (W) XI—HC—78 WW W 200 mm (W) mmm ammm amiawm ’%€°rm mmm %?aimén%¥r d their mother with stone on her head, as a injuries and tater on, she died. PW-12 Dr. post-mortem on the body of the deceased, has stated that on 13-9-20 0 he conducted postmortem and found that there was injury on tempor l region of the head in the size of 6 x 5 cm. There was fracture of temp ral and frontal bone. Blood was clotted in sub-durai region. Cause of death was coma due to injury sustained on head. Therefore, in view of the above ocular and medical evidence, it is established that death of the deceased was homicidal in nature. As far as involvemen of the accused/appellant in crime in question is concerned, PW-7 Lalita a d PW-B Devi Kumar, daughter and son of the accused, have categorically ated that in fateful night they were sleeping by the side of their mother. e accused went outside of the room saying that he is going to attend the call of nature. He brought grinding stone and threw it on the head of their ther. They were able to see the act of the .accused in a street light Leamed counsel fov the accused/appellant has not disputed homicidal death of the deceased. Moreover, PW-7 Lalita, daughter of the accused and PW-8 Devi KLmar, son of the accused, have categoricatly stated that their father atta shop light. ln cross-examination of these witnesses, defence has not been able to elicit any circumstance which makes evidence of these esses unreliable or untrustworthy. PW-11 Santram, father of the dece sed, has also corroborated the evidence of these two witnesses. He h s stated that on the fateful day he came to meet his daughter. He was lso sleeping on the ground in the same room where the deceased was sl eping. The accused attacked the deceased a c e h o n mac—7s EW,WW,W m m .................................................'..... .4.. 5 200 am m (W) mm fain- WWW &@W mwm #az’mm with a grinding stone. Dehati Nalishi EXP/15 was lodged by PW-8 Devi Kumar, who :TsoLcorroborates th‘ evidence of PW-7 Lama. He has stated that the accused/appellant was the person who attacked the deceased with grinding stone. Therefore, om the above evidence and discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the accused was author of the crime in question and to that extent, th re is no illegality or intirmity in the finding of the trial Court. Learned counsel for the ccused/appellant submitted that in this case there is no evidence to show that the accused attacked the dweased with intention to cause her death. ln fact, it is evident from the evidence of PW-7 Lalita that whe the accused threw stone, it first hit the table lying there and thereafter it fetl on the headvof the deceased. Therefore, offence against the ac used/appellant does not travel beyond Section 304 Part-ll of the l.P.C. On the other hand, lea ed counsel for the State/respondent supported the judgment of the trial ourt. Having heard learned cou sel for the parties, we have perused evidence available on record. The e is nothing on record to show that the accused attacked the deceased intention to cause her death. PW-7 t was the motive behind the attack made by the accused. Moreover the deceased was not taken to the hospital in the same night. She was taken next day morning to the Even there is no evidence that \\\ h a