3TI^T^T R^Jcb CT^T sb^ich ^Rci —h ^' ,t,,^. ?, 3^^|ZJH4,^^4l?,]^^l^ OT^?T M^^ft (TTOWT$hHI<n^ .<?:<. A>../.^s<---^ 200 2^ f^^ 3T1^T 5^<TTW ^rf^ chl^Id4l4 HTOTf ^ fe^ <RI<^K ^^rf^rw^r HIGH COURT OF C^HATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DmSIOH BENCH: Appellant CRIMmAL APP^AL 3i0. 1255 OF 2002 Respondent HONl SHRIL.C. BHADOO, & HONl SHRI DHIRENDRA MISHRA, JJ Saiitrain, son of Sliri Sliivdayal, aged about 34 years, resident of vfllage-BaT Bhanta, P.S. Sheormarayan, Dtstt, Jaiijgir Champa (Chliattisgai'h) Versus State of Chliattisgarh Presence: Ms. Piishpa Dwwedi, , c| Mr, Ashish SlmMa. AdclJ 3'unsel for the appdlanf. .. PiibUc Proseciitor for the State, ORAL ^UDGMENT PERL.C.BHADOO, J (12th Tliis appeal.i^ clirected aiid order of sentence dated April 2007) again.st tl'ie judgment:,of conviction 9th September 2002 ptassed by 2nd 227/ 2000 whereby learned Adciitionai Sessions. Judge (IfTC)., .Janjgir iii Sessious Trial No. AdcUtional Sessious , Jiidge aiter holdiiig the accused/appe31m^t g^ilty^.for commissimi of offence under Section 302 :of tlie Indli.an- Penal Code. sentenced hiin to (<N;^^) XI-HC-22 3T1^Tcpr f^ri^w^r ) SbHl<=h ^^ 3^r^|^J<^4,^^ 3TT^T ^l^ich ^l^wi $bN|ch ^(<:T;.^,../.2.S^.,^ 200 2_ f^^ W^T ?^<TTW ^f^T — 2-~ cbHTd4l4 ^IHdT^ te^ <Ri^< ^3Tf^T3T1^T undergo imprisoiiment for default of paym.ent of fiiie to Ijife and pay a fine of Rs. 100/~, iii flirther undergo two nionths? R. I. 2. Case of the proseciitioi| a.m. ui the moniiiig of 28.:| dung iii his house. Bharat SJ ., m brief, is that at about 6.00-7.00 .2000 Man.ohar was collectiiig cow rtnami raised cries that Saiitram has com.m.itted the m.urder of ijol'jjitr'.am^ on wl'iicli he went on the spot aiid saw that body of Johitrai|a. was lyuig cover.ed witli cloth. Aft.er removiiig the cloth, ;he saw tlijat Jolii'trana was lyuig dead aiid tliere was uijury on the occipital r| out of it. The iiicident was w| PW-6 Bhai'atlal. Merg m.tizo.£| (PW-1) aiid 'based dii tliat Fi| registered al Police Station-S| after gi\diig notice (Ex. P/ 5) (Ex.P/6) on tlie body of dec^ Saiitram. 'were seized under E 5gion of Joliitrain, blood was ooziiig itnessed by PW-2 .Muiiiia Suigli aiid .tion (Ex,P/ 2) ¥v7as'giYeii.by Maiiohar :st Iiiform.ation Reporti (Ex.P/ 1) was ^lTLivi'itiarayaii. Iiivestigatijig officer |to the Paiichas, prepai'ed uiquest lased Johitram. Cloth^es of accused x.P/ 8.' Accused' gave mem.oraiidum. (Ex.P/ 9) aiid iii pursuaiice oft|liat one lailii, weapou.of ofence, was sd^ed under Ex.P/ 10, Site p] of deceased iJoliilxain. were Ex.P/ 14 „ Body of deceased exaiiiiiiation to Prmiary He Ex.P/ 16 where Dr. N. Pi-asad prepared postmort.cm rq3ort ^ii (Ex.P/ 13) was prqjared. Clothes 'seized 111 a seal.ed pack.et under |JoIiitraj£i was seiit for postmorteiii [alth Cent.re,. Sliivi'iiiai'ayai.i 'under |(PW-1.0} •conducted po.stmortem.;aiid |Ex.P/.15) ni wliich lie opined that cause of death was braiii hei|iorrhage, niode of death was com.a ((ft^^^) XI-HC-22 3:n^fT^T RFTTOW^T ) 5hH\<^ ^f?cT 1—' 3^ ^TPTT^PT, ^Til^ l(o, t^^l^y 311^1 MSItft ^^.^r:.^.-.4€.<?.?.,.. mwn sh*ii<n ^ 2002- 3TT^fT ?^<TTW ^rf^T ^ j> chi^Id^tiTi ^IH^T ^ te^ <Ri^<i< ^3Tf^T3:n^?T due to head nrjury aiid de^ coBipletion of iiivestigation c] Juclicial Magistrate Fii'st Cla^ case to tiie .Sessions Juct Additional Sessions Judge rec th was hom.icidal ifi natiire. After |iai'ge sheet was filed ui the Court of |s, Jaiijgu' who iii turn committed tiie [ge, Bilaspur fiTjni where leai'iied leived the case on traiisfer for trial. 3. Prosecution examiaed establish chai'ge against the recorded under Section 313 material appear:iiig agaiiist 1 stated that he is iiiiiocent. [3 witnesses at tlie trial iii order to laccused. Statem.ent of accused was of Cr.P.C. iii wluch lie dexiied tlie ijmi ui the prosecutioii evidence aiid 4, Leai'iiecl Additional Ses^ the respective pai'ties, accused/appellaiit as aforeme) 5. We have heaiTl Ms. Pu| behalf of acciised/appeUant a| PubUc Pi-osecutor for tiie Stat^ 6. Leai'ned counsel for tiie ions Judge aJier heariiig counsel for convicted aud sentenced tlie Litioned. ^hpa, leai'ned counsel appeai'iiig on t:id Mr. Aslush Shulda, leai'ned AdcU. 1/respondent. 1accused/ appellaiit has not disputed tlie homicidal death of Joliiti'a^3, Moreover, tlie eyayitiiesses PW-2 Muiiiia Suigh aild PW-6 Bha| accused Saiitraiii attacked ftiel otlier parts of the body, as a r| spontaiieously. " The . abovel ratlal have categoricaJly stated that deceased wifh. lathi 0111'iis head.'aiid ^'sult 'of wliich he feU. down aad; •clied evidence ': of these .witnesses . is (^^^) T XI-HC-22 CT^TcpT R^ich 3TT^T SbHlcf) ^\W "y ^J / ' ^f ^7 3^^TqT^^^^^^^ 311^1 M5|tt» .g^^ .C^.'.^ /^. «^S^ 200 2_ +IWCT1 Sb*11<H f^^' sn^T^irwflf?^ ^- corroborated bv the ewdeiil couducted postmorteiii on t] opuied that deceased died dd chl^Td^n^^l^dl ^ te^ <fa^i< ^a^rsn^r ^e of Dr. N. Pt'asad .(PW-10) who ^ie body of deceased Jolu.tram. aiid |e to braiii hemorrhage and coma on death was homicidal in natu.re, accoiint of head trijury aii| therefore, it is estabUshed th^t death ofJohitram. wa% homicidal iii nature. 7, As fai' as uivolvement ^f tlie accused/appellaiit iri criiiie iii question is concerned, tlie cc^rviction is based 03.1 -tlie evidence o.f eye^vitaesses najD.ely PW-2 lAuiiiia Siiigli aiid PV/-6 Bfaai'atlal. Thev liave stated that on tl|i Jolutrain was .sittuig on tlie..c^ was passiiig .tlirozigh culvert latbi iii liis haiid. He attackedl of wl'iich fatal iiijuries were s| aiid braiii material was visible | ie date. of uicident u'i"the .iB.oniiiig lilvert, at tliat tim-e ac.cused Saiitram |aloug with buffalo. He was carryiiig IJoIiitram. witli that lathi, as a result liistauied by Johitraiiip he feU down |ttu'ougli the iiijury. accused/appeUaiit. ai'giied tliat the abovewituesses have stated tl'l.at tliey.were present at the scene of occurrence aiid have aclmitte(| tl'iat tliey .clid not try to iiiteTvene when acc'ased .Saiitram.'was }ittackhig Joliitraoi, therefore, their conduct was uiniatu.ral, as s-lich their presence at.!th.e scene.-of occurrenceis doubtfi.il. • • 8, Leai'ned counsel for. thel (^^i^r) I 'l !• 1 XI-HC-22 3^ r^N|^,^Tn<rlllG, t^^Wy 3Tl^T MUch »nwfi$b*iiw »-<-»»*V«^••<C?5<«Y*<*<('**-<• ^li_l T^l ^^ chl^Id^ ^lH^lT ^ fe^ <RI^<I< ^3Tf^T3TI^n' 3. Lookiiig to the eviden<| learned coun.sd for.-the accu e of PW-2 Mmma Sitigli aiid PW-6 Bhai-atlal, we ai'e not conv^iced by tlie ai'giiment advaiiced by sed/appellaiit for the reasou tliat it depends upon persoa to pers^n as to how he reacts to a particular situatiou. It is not necessai^ tliat a persoii witiiessiiig the criine wi]l. alwavs try to iiiteryene ui| case the above 'bvo witness nothiag has beeii dicited tlie niatt.er. Moreovery 111 tlie pr.esent •es are ..itidependent witnesses arid in the cross-exam.ifiation which ciiscredits the evidence of th^se Uvo witaesses. Apai't from. tliat, PW~2 Mumia Suigh has ca|tegoricaUy stated tliat hc saw the accused attackiiig Jolutram. l|i1l deatli, he shouted aiid thereafter tiitbrmed Maiiohar (PW-Ij, |brother of tlie deceased. PW-6 Bhai'atlal has also stated tha^ hewituessed tlie accused attackuig Johitram with lathi aad on c^ies beiiig raised brother of deceased Maiiohai\ caziae tllere, by tha|: time accused had alrcady left the spot wtth weaponlof ofienc^ lathi and when they wenl near Johitram, he .was -already 4ead« The . evidence ,of these two by the meclical evidence of Dr. N. witnesses staiids corroborate^ Prasad (Pw-10) wlio condu^ deceased Johitraoi aiid found ted postm.ortem. 011 the body of :liat there was iiijury 011 the occipit.al region of Jolutram aiid brai4i material was -visible thiTjugti the itijury. Hc has stated tliat on| Johitraiii, he clied sponta£i<] hemorrhage.. Thercfore, in' accouut.of head iiijury sustaiiied' by ^ously' as a resiilf pf' coma aiid |iew of abcwe we do . uot' fiiid. any ,cd o] •mconsistency iii tiie'.evidenc^ of PW-2 . Mumia Siilgh aiid PW-6. ;;• (<ft^y^) XI-HC-22 3^''^l<41d4,@^'M*l®,TS«''wy 3TT^9T ^l^i^h i-nwfT$b^icn^ .Q^rT:/^:. /. ^5.sr. ^ 200 2- f^re^ 3^T^T R^i<=b3TI^?T sPTW^rf?cT SbHI<=h V- ^ •M' ^^ sn^T^iraTflfN chl^Id4l4 ^IIHdT^ te^" <Rl^<i< ^3Tf^T3TT^T Bharatlal 'aiid uotliiiig has c4me on record to make tlie evidence of the.se two witnesses. untrusfo+orthv or uiu'eliable. ' . • i® Learned counsel for noUiiiig has'been brouglit oi^ aftacked Joliitraiii with aii inl ttie . accused/appeUaiit ai'gTied that r.ecord to show that the accused haci :ention to. cause death» • . llt. : Iii order to appreciat.ej the argiiment- advan.ced by learued Ippdlaiit, we have scrutiiuzed tlie l)n case, accused attaeked Joliitrain resutf .of wliich occiprt.al bone wa% counsel for •the acci.ised/a|j ^idence. As per prosecuti| •^dtli"lat.hi on hi.s liead, as- ^ fractured aiid br<Mii. materi|al was wsib.le tluough 'the .-iiijury, therefore, looldng to tlie ma| Joliitrara. with latlii 011 vital oj uier iii wliich tlie.accused attacked I'gaii oftlie l)-ody, tliat too with such a force.that deceased Jolut.ra3|a sustaMied fat.al iiijuries. as braiii material was wsible through s^mie, the iiitention of accus<i large. 12, 'tirthe result,-the appe^ to be dismissed aud is.hereby Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge |the nijury.aiidhe succurabed to the |d to cause death of Johitrai.'ii is.writ 1 beuig • devoid of substaiice is liable dis-missed,_ Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge (ift^y^)