HG—78 3D^iW Vi-U-^i 'ffaiT SB^I WRW S) 3^r •^wi'ft'ti, w-^ww, ^'/>wy. cjy-A- ^-"U^IQ^- •t---^ 200 a(i^?r'flRra; (l<!i('l^<w) TRIIW ^lfOT SII^t APPELLANT/ (Accussd) (!n Jail) RESPONDENT °'l St^ Mi (Crimin^l Appeai uncj •^- • ' '^ ~\ Division Bench ^ \ Hon'ble Shri L.C. Bhadoo & Hon'ble Shri Sunil KumarSinhd 26-10-2007 Heard Shri Ravindra Agrs Mlshra. Panei Lawver for the Stat Todav Shis appeai has bi susDension of seniencs & orant o appeal. During the course of evewitnesses have tumed hosti counsel fcr the parties, it is decide Ora! judgment dictated on L.C. Bhadoo. J This appeal is directed ag; sentence dated 26-6-2007 passe( Sessions Trial No.152/2006 whei *lll<'l<il'< ^WvS ^fS^I <I"itSK ^sfRpT^n^T era Chanci, aged 30 years, S/o Daursm, ; viilags Sslsciuia, Polics Station Jaijaipur, >tt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). -Versus- ite of Chhattlsgarh, Through the District gistrats, Janjgir-Champa (CG). erSection 374(2) ofthe Cr.P.C.) ,JJ jwal, counsel for the appeltant & Shn Akhii fe/resoondent. feen iisied for orders on admission and for t baii to the sppeilant, durino pendencv of the argibments. it was noticed that in this case al ile. therefore, with the consent of iearned jd to hear the appeal for fina! disposal. Sais. aaiinst the judgment of conviction and order of by She Additiona! Sessions Judge, Janjgir, m teby learned Additional Sessions Judge after e—78 '^.*^ 'tilEsagrf 3lI^I?5I'fyiW 'gqT3iR?IB^R? 3^T'4rai^PT, ^Tfly'lti, (s|01^^< "^ 200 an^r Traq? (tpf^^i) ^mw^feT 3ii^i 'l)l<<I<'l41"f 114dl if.fS^ <(»lt!;l< ^aifOT 311^1 hniolding the accused/appellant gif 302 of the Indian Penal Code for | Khikhi Bai, sentenced him io unc) Rs.200/-, in defauit of pavment of| 2) Case oftheprosecution, in| the mother of accused/aDpellantl accused/apDeilant wa^ taken fpr On 14-3-2006, thg accused was^ this deceased asked him as the removs the shawl and work with Ity for commission of offence under Section committina the murder of his mother namelv, jergo imprisonment for life & to oay a fine of ine to further undergo R.l. for one month. |brtef, is that Khikhi Bai (since deceased) was Inamely, Heera Chand. On 11-3-2006, the It'eatment to Bamhanibana Ashram, Akaltara. 11A<- (itting covering his bodv with/shawl. Seeing Isun has alreadv risen, therefore, he shouid enraaed the accused and said that t\. ., h but he wiii not work^ml He hasl picked up a v/ooden ptank iying plank repeated!v 3-4 times on thl Khikhi Bai became unconscious Hospital by boys of Ashram nam|s namelv, Krishna Chand. After g| Biiaspur, where she was admitted on 18-3-2006. Merg intimation.fE) Clty Kohwali, through -Ward Boy In-charge undsr Ex.P/10 and was Dehati Nalishi Ex.P/12 was given CIMS. Based on that First Informbtion Investiaating Officer after giving inquest (Ex.P/2) on the bodv of del the persons worklng in the Ashram, which he will not work. He is beina asked to work, been brought here aaainst his v/ishes. He lat the spot and attacked with that wooden fe head of his mother, as a result of which land fe)l down. She was taken to Akaltara leiy, Naresh & Anil and brother of accused Ivlng first aid. she was referred to CIMS. land ultimatelv she succumbed to the iniuries t.Pff) vvas sent to the out post Police Station land same was recorded by the out post bent So Police Station Akaitara with Ex.P/11. |by Krishna Chand to out post City Kotwali, Report (Ex.P/13) v/as registered. The Inotice (Ex.P/1) to the Panchas, prepared at:eased Khikhi Bai. Site plan (Ex.P/S) of the 3II^I3il1?:ti?; ^rqr sn^r ^Tii^n g^^ siHRSq', girfto?, Rl^l+fy "WI. 200 an^r IR^ (l?fy^i) TOiRK'(lf5<t31I^t *i<i(<-i41-i»ninifif.fal<il<r«it<{i< ^? siRpl SII^T place of occurrence was Drepared on the bodv of deceased in CIMSI He opined that the cause of deatt and extradural hemorrha.ge. Posthortem 3) Judicial Magistrate Fjrst Class. Jd After compietion of jnvestidation, charge sheet was fited in the Court of Inigir. who in turn committed the case to the ir. from where learned Additionai Sesslons lontransferfortriai. Court of Sessteins Jufage, BiSasp -\. Judge, Janjgir, recsived the same. 4) In order to estabiish thel prosecution examined 14 witnes; recorded under Section 313 of tt denied the materia! appearing ac pleaded innocence. 5) Learned Additional Sessic respective parties, convicted ai aforementioned. 6) We have heard Shri Ra appellant and Shri Akhii Mishra. P; 7) !n this case the eyewitne iodged the Dehati Natishi (Ex.P/1: accused and son of the deceased not aiven bv him. PW-5 Radha bythe Patwari. Postmortem was conducted Biiaspur by Dr. Mahesh Rawat Rai (PW-11). 1 was coma, as a result of both intracranial reportisEx.P/16. charge against the accused Derson, the es. Statement of the accused person was e Code of Criminal Procedure in which he ainst him in the Drosecution evidence and |ns Judge after hearing counse) for the hd sentenced the accused/appeiiant as t/indra Agrawal, learned counse! for the jnel Lawver for the State. ts namelv. Kirshna Chand CPW-10), who has turned hostlte. He is the brother of the 1 He staied that Dehsti Naiishi (Ex.P/12) was 8ai, the other eyewitness, has aiso turned ^tKaa) ^fVi^. sfl,i 1 A ^ J J <i:'l. '^'y ' "OtE&i^ 3D^it W l<-!l.'=n wnan^nrt^ ^ ;-i'?i^?'^N TEST •^ww<i, WtwiS, Rioiuy "WI. 200 sii^yr 'VRK (iyf-i«i<tr) '^IT^R "^fttT 3TI^T hostile and she has not supportecj stated that Krishna Chand (PW-115) by the accused, whereas Krishnal no other evewitness to the incidert:. case & tendered into evidence. 8) Therefore, in this case the enniie connect the acCused Wth the Judge has convlcted the appe!!a^ judgment of trial Court convicti sustained. 9) In the result, the appeal uoon the appellant under Section He is acquitted of the said cha required to be detained in any 10) Consequently, I.A.No.1, a arant of bail stands disposed of. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge cbl'tll^l^l'1 tIR^f ^fe1^' <Rq-t$t< ^srRpTsn^T the prosecution case. PW-6 Anil Joshi has informed him about the offence committed Chand (PW-10) has turned hostite. There is Even the FSL report is also not filed in this •e is no ocuiar or circumstantial evidence to auestion. Learned Additional Sessions itwithout any legai evidence, therefore, the ng & sentencing the accused cannot be si(cceeds. Conviction and sentence imposed 1302 of the Indian Penal Code are set aside. tge. He be set at libertv forthwith unless oth^r case. ?plication for suspension of sentence and Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge