CFOOOWB'429'1 © JN THE HIGH GOURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR.(MP). iS / APPELLANT^ ( IN mit) ^-.^•"^ cbA .' v:-' ~s'~'' 'ci -'^ ...-••" 1^.--: .A...1^^^^ ^/s~'l'\;^ ^ F' Crinainal Appeal No ^______/2000 Buddha Raci @ FSrmal s/o. Tijaoo Satnaai, Aged about 32 years, R/o. Tumhani,p.S. Bilaiganj, EAstt- Baipur. ( MP). VERSUS RESPONDENT The State of tedhya pradesh Through R.P.Kendra Bilaigarh, Distt.- Ratpur( j ^. APPEAL UNDER SEGTION 374( 2V OF CR.P. G. 'o'^ HiGH COUKT OF CHHATTISGARH ; BILASPUR CRIMISAl, APPEAL N0. 2247 OF 2000 Buddha Ram ®,Nirmal State ol Madbva Pradesh (Nuw- Chhattisgarh) ^D HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH s BILASPUR CRIMINAL APPBAL N0. 2247 OF 2000 Buddlia Ram (al, Nlrmai vs. State of Madhva Pradesh /—,-^—- rf"tl-,l-—A<*.5——u.,-.l-.l |liuv» '^iAila.tl.lagi&Tuj HON'BLE SHRI FAI5IRUDDIN, J 85 HOK'BLB SHRI DHIRE?®RA^ISHRA, J Sliri Devesli CIisTid-rs. \^Grm&. couusel for tlie appeilant. cti">r-' r^ v r^TToiT'^ r\T7 r^f^rt- A/-IT?' f"T' ^l-*-^ Q+/s+-=> Ollil i-/.lV* v-TWcuj-C/, iJV • <-"-'v i-< r^.U.'v* 1U1 U.1C. OLfcitC-* JU u GM BNT Heard ieamecl counsel tor me parties. 'A. 'l'tie appellant nas preterrea Uus appeal against tne iudgment dated 19-7-2000 passed in S.T.No. 185/99 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, whereby he nas Oeen convictect under yecuon 'du'2 ol me indian Fenal Code tbr causing murder of Bhanu on 12-3-1999 and sentenced to undergo impnsonm.ent tor lite ana nne ot Ks.&UUU/- and in detauit ot pavment ot tuie, sunpie unpnsorunent tor one year. 3. Brieflv stated the prosecution story is that Chaitrani FW- 1 and Bliaau &oUi were douig me Dusuiess ot purcnase and sale ot ox and buttaloes anct tney were parmers in ttie Dustness. Un 11-3-1999 at about 6.30 a.m., the complainant and Bhanu went to sale the ox to Bualgarh. They stayed in the house of 'l'iiauram. un i^-3-iyyy, cnaltram ana Utianu were grazmg the ox in fhe tield. At about 9.00 in fhe moming Budhram. alias <© Nirmal armecl witn nauimer ui uie nana cam.e to unanu and pushed hiin and fen down him and gave 3-4 hammer blows on rus cnest. 'l'ne couiplainant saw it ana wnen ne persuaded mm not to do, ttie accusea tned to assault nun. As a result 01 namm.er blows, Bnanu aied. unaitram J.octgecl me report Ex.P/1 at about 10.10 a.m. wmcn was recorcted bv S.L. cnounan. in me report Budnram nas Deen namea as assailant. 'rnen merg Ex.F./^ was recorcted. l-'olice went to me spot and. preten'ea spot map. rancnnam.a Ex.r/^ was preparect. Memorandum ot accused Kx.F/S was recoraea ana a tiaminer was seized vicie Ux.F'/b. 'l'fae deaa Doay was sent tor autopsy anct ur. iMarayan yingn. concluctect autopsy ana suDmittea autopsy report Ux.F/ 13. Accorauig to me report, cause ot cleatn was snocJ? clue to excessive bleeding. 4. Atter investigation challan was med and charge was tramea. 'rne appeuant abiurea tne gmit and contenctea. mat ne nas tieen talselv uiipucated.. 5. Leamed Court below atter hearing ftie counsel for the parues anct appreciating me evidence, touna uie appeuant guittv and convictecl anct sentenced nun as stated. aDove. 6. Shri Verma, learned coiinsel lor ttie appellant, assailed tne conviction on me ground mat mere is no legal anct reuable evidence on record. He contenclea t&at eviclence ot FW-l cnaitraia and pw-b J-'ramoa 'l'iwari is not u'ustworuiv and. tnere . are aiscrepancies m meu~ versions. -5 7. Leamed counsel tbr the ytate, on me other hand, supportea me luagment aad tmdmgs. y. tioiaiciaal aeaui 01 uie deceasea is not ui dispute. P.w. lu Ur. Maravan Singn pertonnea autopsy on Uie clead bodv aacl suDmittea autopsy report icx. J-'-ia. J-le tonna mat Uiere was an innir^' on the right side of fhe forehead. Flrst tmger of riglit nand was Droiien near patm. 'rnere was swelimg in me entire cnest aad. it was Dluisn. 'l'nere was abrasion in tos ngnt palm. Kibs were OroKen. 'rne aoctor opuiea Uiat tne aDove uiiuries were ante mortem ana Uie iniuries ot Kitis are senous ui nature. 'l'ne cause ot deam is snocK aue to excessive bleedmg. Therefore; fhe honiicidal death of fhe deceased is estabUshed. y. 'l'ne convicuon m tnis case is Dased on evewitaess account of PW-1 Chaitram. and PW-6 Pramod Tiwari. P.w'. 1 cnaitram is me person wlio was companion ot uie aeceased and both of them. had gone to the vulage. He has stated fhat wnen mey were grazing ox ana Duttaloes at vmage Uunani, accused Budhram canie to Bhaniu-am. and assaulted on his cnest Dy nammer. wnen •ne persnadeci nun not to ao, Buctliram. also chased nim to beat. Bhanu clied. on spot. He went to me J-'ouce station, yilaigarn and loagea VlK Ex.r/ i. He further stated fhat Police went to fhe spot and issued summon lor pancnnama anct ne is wiuness ot Kx.p/a. in cross- examination, he stated Uiat he and cleceased. were ttiere at tne place where the incident occurred and no other was fhere. He \ and tinanu were 2UU ineters away irona eacn ouier. He was grazrng two oxen aad JBUanu was grazlng tour oxen. Cfialtram ana Bnanu botti are co-brouier-in-law ana were ctoing uie tiusuiess. l-te nas denied Uiat uiere was any ctispute betn'een tnem.. He clicl not intorm. to uie Kotwar Dut instantlv went to i^ i!»8 pouce stauon. wnen ne was suggestea tnat because ot dispute Detween nun ana aeceasea, ne nas Kmea me cleceasect and unpucatect me accused Decause ne stopped nim and mat is wnv he did. not give anv intbrmation to Kotwar and. directlv intormed about the uicldent to the Police, he denied this suggestion. 1U. FW-b J-Tam.ocl 'l'iwari is anomer evewitness to me incictent. in ms evidence, ne stated ttiat in Uie moming at 6.30 nrs. tie went to viuage uum.an. wmie ne was going to tiuaigarn, ne saw tnat Jjudliram assauited unanu by namnier. He saw tuin beamig mnce Dy nammer. ynrawan who is bromer-in-law of uuanraDi was uiere. wnen ynravan asKea somettung to Budnram., ne cnased nun. 'rnen ne (l-'w-b) came to uilaigarn on ms motorcycle and intornied aDout ttie incictent to Koslesh Dubey. This witness has also been cross-exaiiuned. In cross- exainination, u~us witness nas stated tnat ne was alone on Uie motorcycie. l-te saw ynravan on me place ot inciclent anct nearby otner persons were ttiere but he does not know them. He Knowa Buanram suice long and ne naa worised wim nim. He stated that he knew Bhanu since last two years. He used to come to take payment. He further stated that he had no clealings witfi. unanu. J-le stated tnat as soon as Bnanu was beaten by ham.rn.er, he feu down. He has denied the suggestion tAat me ottence was committea by snravan and ne nas seen uucinram aoing ttie onence. l-te stated mat ne Knows fcinravan. He trutner stated mat ne nact seen tnree assaults and ttien he went on his motorcycle. He further stated that he has no enmitv wim me accused. pw-ia Koslesn uubev nas also stated mat ne was at nis nome. J-Taiaoct 'l'iwari caiae to mm and told tnat a murcler nas taKen piace near uutiam Koaa anci Buam'ain has kuled a person by hamnier. Pramod asked to give inlbrmation to Police Station and he went to Police Station with Pramod and informed about it. P.W. 10 Dr. Narayan Suigh conductea autopsv on Uie dead bocly and tound mat cause of death was shock due to excessive bleeding and it was caused intentionallv. We have gone through fhe evidence of these nvo evewitnesses and P.W. 13 Koshlesh Dubev. T'heir version is categorical and there is nothing to discredit it. 11. Leamed counsel for the appeUant also contended that mere are cliscrepancies regaraing seizure and recoverv' ot Jtanim.er. 'l'fie niinor aiscrepancies nere and mere are Dounct to occur. 'l'liev are natural and snow uiat t&e witnesses nave not been tutorea. Apart trom ttiat, in a case iitce Uus, wnere there is eyewimess account ancl wmcn nas been reued upon, minor .discrepaacies do not affect the prosecution story. Z^~X l'2. Bo tar as otience uncter Secuon 'dU'2 ol l.^.C. is concemea, !«W froni fhe medical evidence of Dr. Naravan Suigh P.W. 10 and autopsy report Ex. P-13, it is clear that uiluries were caused intentionally to kUl. Ribs were cut and iniuries of ribs were s/rious'. The nature of inlury caused to the deceased, place ot boav wnere uiiunes faave been causect ana me weapon usecl bv T.ne appellant wmch is a hammer, clearlv establish ttie mtenuon of fhe appellant to kiu Bhanu. Having given our thoughtful consideiatlon, in Uie opinion ot ttiis Court, ttie trial Coiirt was lustitied in convicting me appeuant tor oflence punlsnable uncter section 'do'2 ot l.i-'.u. r'atiiaK 13. T'he conviction is weu merited and the appeal is devoid of force an(^accoraingly the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge \\.