ti_4. — •'& -.. -•?1-V B!NIJ .'8Klil B9JK?iSiai;?'Wi^i^B^B^^W%(K!:i -f 'a's^m .sssss- x.ss'fsaas s@a SBS«3A ^ rKB;1 ^Ka<<K)i--8fi3E¥8-'*tESSli:a . • ': 11: ! |S*S*a:-:¥g'ffi@©g-|@%®fT^:.:, :• • SB;feKIS5:sa?sx;fs?';a;a©a»1.assy';' : - ^•E^^es?'^sx§:-ms!x.^<siM. .! :;";';iss'a»?s;vfSBSssass^'y • .. .-• ^ (^^•?;:,^t®@s^-.S^:*^^"irea^'&^WE:^l:::"^ :.;:::;, - - • :^;; i:%*'B'^l8flaa%§K*.'sv:f3'wss&ss@as'"a@: •3Ss&e'e!::'iss's^gE'"!ss -)t-y.(S- V£C sss'nssss, EB BEII SSSiB9SSS9wSWvs1 irU1KWS¥^Rt;^ ^HIUJUJO^^IA^^I.^-^'^ 8Kt9QOOOOd3 wffl •rw;i XI-HC-78 3n^T^irf?:ira; cISIT3TTOTsb11°h AtSg-SSis-fti-Ea +11*1MI Sh*11<*) 3^ •^lllct'M, ®Tf)(l'l6,(c|di«iy __ 63^- fl-. ^-S-S-7. 200 c Sll^l yacft (yit'i'sii^T) gHnwdfStra-n^T &ivision Bench: - Honbie Mr. L.C. Bhadoo ond Hon'ble Mr. iShirendra Mishra, 13-2-2007 AAr. Surya Ksnt fViishra, nAr. Ashish Sh-uk!s, Addi coL|nsat for th's sppeilant. ^ional Publie prosecutor- for the State/ Orai judgment dictated on lOo/a hi,; ^- the Tne appslisnt has prefer're^ Code of Crimincl Procedure aaainslt Sessions Triai No.58/2000 by Bazaar, whsreby lesrnsd Additio|i guiity of causing dscth of appel'snt under Sections 452, 3Q'i unde.-go R.I. for three yesrs -^ impriaonment for life cnd pdy a seven years cnd psy s fine of R^. STipulaTion. Case of the prosecution, i^ obscene overtures towards mothi objected to by Savita os aiso by *i-yf<-i4).f tii^dTffte^tT^nzK ^3T)^1T3TI^T this Qppaci under Ssction 374 (2) of the t ths judgrnent datsd 13-6-2000 passed in 2 Additionai Sessions Judge, Baiods ^ioS Sessions Judge hotding the appsllant ', (ged 2 yes"s, has convicted the <& 3Q7 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to |nd pay a fins of Rs.500/-, to under9o of Rs.1,000/-, cnd to undergo R.I. for s.1,000/-, respectively, wlth usua! dafault Takslshwar fine b-ief, is thct the appeilant iissd to pass :r of the deeeased Swita (PVV-SV. !t was h^r husband snd in this respsct s Panchcyet P.T.< \ T—S XI-HC-78 •sT^r^Tf^ira; awa'n^rstiii'h ^•11"f's?^;*^^^ c-y-f^sss *TW^f aiNI<»i 3ST-<<1<<1<V1<1, »Tfl<H'IS, (sldiyy ^.(h.£i..^.^^ 200 3ll^l>4ach (yit^si^ff) ??ciTW:«fBcT3n^r wcs convened wherea compromi^e which the aooelSsnt sssured that I On 4-12-1999 st sbout 4 p.m. +4 entered into the house of Savital a'as holding hsr two yesr old d^ sssaulted thsm by sxe gs arssuit ove" parietai reoion cnd left ch< thrsa iridsed Sn.juries over his heoM fdr Report wss lodged by ths t 1} on the ssme day ot about 2Q;3^ the bosis of rahich offence Mo.; vide Ex.P-3.. Savite ivcs sent Csntre. Saioda Bozsar. whsrs &r. iA'ounds over tha head region cs ad'/issd X-rsy of skull. Inquest o was prepcred in ths presence of decscsed Takeshraar wcs sent Sabds Bazscr, whsrs D". R.S. the oerson of the decessed and s 27. In the post-mortaffl report, t! over hasd on ths occipital rsgion incissd wound over r'ight ear of si incised wound verticai over right cm. The doctor opined the cs'iisg fi fo|r <»)i<<F<'i<fl-f *iitii-iTiffg^t'<Ri«i< ^sri^iTsn^r was crrived on 2-10-1999 of Ex.P-18 by isnceforth he would not be teasina Savitc. 5 p.m. the sppe'isnt armed with an axe and csssuited Savits, at thst tims, Sc'.'its ^csssed child on her i;sp. Tns appellsnt of which Savita sustained arisvous iniuries 2sk. Deceased Tskashwar slso sustained a and disd instcirstaneousiy. ib'jsband of Ssvita nsmeSy, Bhsgchond I'PW- i0 hours in Poiice Stction: Baioda Bazacr ors 27|2/99 '&'as registered agcinst the appeliant medical e.xsmination to Primary Health IPramod Tiwari (PW-4^ found three incised d4scr'ibed in the AA.'-.C. report of £<.P-3who d^scribei |/er the dead body of deceassd Takeshwar Ithe w'rtnessss vids Ex.P-17. The bcdy of DQSt-raor'tem to Pr'imar'v Heoith Centre, li^ar'i (PW-15) conducted post-mor'tem over jubmitted his oost-mortem fsoor't of Ex.P- doctor found one incised wound situsted bf sizs 7 cms. x 2 cms. x 1 cm. bons deeo; ^e 4 crns. x 1 cm. x f cm. on ths iower pc"t; ^capuiar' "egion of size 8 cms. x 3 cms. x f of desth of the child due to comms as a -•.—.__JL _ iifrar'i the \\, XI-HC-78 3n^T?irf^TR; OTTSITWsbll* l't!E*iSB:l'SS3S 3^''<ll<(lcl'i), »Tfl«'l<o,Rl<-)l'My< HI^RTTSh+llch .<^...A. ^5:7 ^ 200^5 311^1 ^iach (yi(^sK^tr) BHtTWHf?(f3n^T resuit of injury No.l over the hea|j producsd by some hcrd and sharp object snd the same was homicidsi in natilre. Bed head tickst and other taken into possession vide seizurf p"2pared. Weaoon of offence <d memo of Ex.P-16 from the house articles rjers ssnt for chsmics! e>t Raipur, vide Ex.P-24. Rsoort of tha After compieting investiga' Additiona! Chief Judicial Ma9istr the case to the Sessions Juda. transfe" for trisl by the iearn4d Baz-acr. Lssrned Sessio.is Judge f> 452 of the I.P.C. aqainst the orosscution i n order to estsftlish Thereafter. statement of ths recorded in which the appal'ant -iim, plesdad irinocenee snd folse Judge bv the imouonsd .iudamen'tl above. 'hi^Fyfl-i tiiHciTiftei^l'<Ri^i<. ^arf^iTan^r i-reatment papers of Ex.P-5 of Switc were 2 memo Ex.P-22. Sits plcn of Ex.P-9 was ;e was taken into pcss^sion vide ssizure of the compiainant. Blood stcined seizsd :am]nation to Forensic Science Laboratory, FSL is Ex.P-26. ion, charge sheet was fiied in the Court of ite, Baloda Bazace", who in turn committed ;, Raipur and the same was received on 2 Additional Sessions Jud9£, Baioda £. frtemed chcrqe under Secticns 307. 302 and appellant who abjursd his guilt. The its csse exsmined 16 witnessas. under Ssction 313 of the CrP.C. was snied the circumatances appearing 09cinst implicQtion. Leorned Additionci Sessions eonvicted the aoDellant and sentenced ss acdused dsn P.T.O. r^ \, XI-HC-78 sn^r^iTR-fi'* tTSIT3Tiq?T5))Hl<») 7S! •^1<11<1<1, ®tfl*f'i6,R|cliy^< HWW\ sh*licb &?.A ^.7. ^ 2000 311^1 4s|ch (t<:'(^<sl<^iT) ??crrw:?rf?cT3ii^T furtther Learnsd counsel for the a( stsrtsment of Savits (PW-21 it witu! she was aione present in the ho(ise Mantora ff'W-3) clainis to b.e thel thers is contradiction with resoe<tt tims of the incident. It is sustsined injuries in the incident, he WGS prosecutsd undsr Section that the genesis of the offencsl prosecution, in fact the sppe!!ont| owed a sum of Rs.5,000/- to Rs.6|, animosity, ths appelicnt has been the oppel!cnt to ki!i the two year) the appeilcnt be scquitted. On the other hand, lear"] State/respondent supports the Ji^ Ws have hecrd isarned dnsrw sheet. as aiso the svidenci From perusal of the docijmsnt (^ Koliram (PW-11) it is observed th| Shaochand, the complainant, for 2-10-1999 snd in the ssid tried to eiops with Scvita snd a <sbl's|f<1<fl-1 t||t|llT^''feI^l'<Rl«K ^srf^ITSn^T ;pel!ant submits that from per'usci of the !d be evident thst she hcs claimed that when the incidsnt occurred. howeve!*. eysisitness of The said incident. as such. to the Dressnce of the witnesses st ths argued that the appeHtint hcs siso he had tried to commit suicids and further 309 of the I.P.C. siso. It is further crgued hcs been deiibisrately suODr'esssd bv the had gone to the house of Savits as Savita ,OQO/- to the oppeiiant and in view of this rosed in the case. There is no motive for 'old chi!d. In the cforesaid circumstances lear'ted Additions! Public Prosecutor for the Ji^igment of the trial Court. ^ounsei for the por'ties and perussd the produced by the prosscution to the tricl. |f Ex.P-18 which has been duiy provad by ^it the appeliant used to tease the wife of \his purpose, a Panchcyat woiS comsnsd on Panchlsvat. the apDsllant odmitted that he had report to that incident was to_be made, ^ P.l.u. •\ XI-HC-78 sn^rqiTf^TR; traT311^1sb^i<b *<I*IMI ai*Tra» 3ST '<liqid<l, 8''rfl<1'IS, RlCIKiy .^..^..p^^.-s.pj^^ 200<3 311^1 4aq> ('icttfll'^T) ?RiTW:(rf?(T3n^r howsver, on the basis of that !n4 the said Panchayst a compromiss^ appeiiant had promissd that hs sS^ inforwction rsport Ex.P-1 has beeh Savtta cnd father of ths decesse^ sppsilcnt used to tease his wifs convened aoainst the appsliant a( thct henceforth he wi!! not see incident when he had aone to tH returned home to fesd the b4 some+hina has haDDened in his h4 and saw that his iwifs was standij her cheek & head, when he ws| Tckeshwar desd, he hsd sustaine| mstter has come OUT. Tliereerfter'l examination of this witness, df disc"edits ths stistement of this wf Savita PW-2), injur'ed wi1 used to maks obscene overtur-es in the ssid Panchcyat the appel Sovitc in future. On the fateful aone to field and she had r'etur'ne was feeding her baby. fihe saw th and ssked her to eiooe with him, «hi<il?i<f1-f*i iicfl'ff te'^l'<Ri«i< ^a'rf^irsn^r [ident, 1+ie Panchayat was convened and in deed of Ex.P-18 was drawn in lafhich the jali not rspsot his act in future. The first proved by Bhagchand PW-I), husband of who has stated in his deposition that the sincs last 6-7 months, a Panchayat was (id in the said Panchayst, he had assursd Slavita with any svil desire. On the dats of |e fieid ffiith his fother and his wife had jby, he was informed by Manohar that luse. whereuoon he rsturned to his houss |i9 in front of the door with injuries over ht inside the house, he found his child tl in.iuries ovsr his riaht ear and his brsin he lodoed the reoort of Ex.P-1. In cross- ^fence couid not slicit anything which litnsss. ness, has s!so stated that the cppel'ant tlawar'ds her, s Panchayat wcs conv'ened and la^it gsve in writing thst he shal! not teose jlay whsn her husband & father-in-iaw hsd jd to her home at about 3.30 p.m. snd she ^e appel'ant entersd her home with an axe bn her rsfuscl he assulated ths chiid with 1 \\, ,.'. V^-.^EX^ ^.B^*UL.! XI-HC-78 3TI^rq)T)^TR? (WTSn^Tsblich qiHCTT;*i*TT^i 3^' r<ii<4iin'i<, (STf)«'i<»,|si<'ii<Hy< ,.Co..fi..?.-.^^-.?4^ 2000 •3<i^i Maw (lici(3siqff) 5?dTW?rf5(T3:n^T the QX£, she raised cn alert that + was trying to pick up ths chi!d, th[ hsr head. isft cheek. and theredfter been cross-examined by the dsf^nce given on behaif of the defsnce thk of S.s.6-7 thousand which has besl bsen abis to eiicit anythina in th| discredits the statement of thi3 i4 Tha statement of this statement of Msntora pW-3), si: the date of incident when she woj accused stopped her aid soid 'i him to which she denied. whereuj eiope with him he wouid ki!I her o| also sssaulted the son of Savita ij he asssulted her sister over hei| sxamination of this witness. cradibility of this witness, ond t| this wltnsss ors insignificsnt. Statement of the sbove corroborated by the statemsnt o-fl information reoort. From the d^ Ksiiram pW-11) which find corroi^ Wilness <tlK<fl1<fl-f H|t|t-lTiftelA<R]<^K ^T3rf^[T3TI^T 'he appeiicnt has ki!led har child, when shs 2 accused assaulted her also by tha cxe on ', she faintsd. Tnis witness has slso ince ;2t length and a suggestion 'nss baen nt tha accused has jn fact advanced a !ocn i denied by this witnssg. Defencs hcs not 2 cr'osg-exsmination of this wltness lohich itness. ddn't pW-2) is duly corroborsted by the ter of Savita, svho hss also stoted thct on going for arinding flour, st thct tiine, the n't go", he ssked her sister" to elope with >on the aDDsllsnt said thst if she wil! no" id her daughter and assaulted by CD<£. He ind he gave thres axe biows. Thersafter, head and cheek bv sxe. In the cr'oss- has not been abis to elicit the ia omissionfi pr-essnt ip. the statement of d4fence too eyawitness pW-2 & PW-3) ars duly PW-l, as also by the pfomptly lodged first icument of Ex.P-18 and the statement of oration from the statament of PW-1, PW- XI-HC-78 3l1^T^iTfS:ri°R (raTSfI^Tshllti Soma Hi^ni a>w^i 3^ •-^ww-'i, w^v'ie, Riciiuy .(^,A;^^5-7 2000 3ll^l iia<o(yiI^q(^<T) gTBRRHfS^Sn^T t|i£ dnt 2 <& PW-3 also the fact that towords Ssvita in the past, [s e^l dste of incident slso the appe!! presence of Mantora (PW-3) cnc) dealt lethai bbw on the deceosedl o!d chi!d Taksshwar, hs aiso her ovsf her- hssd. These assaults Ssvits where the appeilcnt hod gojie attejmpted consideHed Tnerefore, in the after meticubusiy examining the appellant guilty and sentenced ss appr'eciation of evidence avsilabl interferencs. In the resuit, the appeal impugned judamerit is devoid of and is aecordincilv, diamissed, Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge itiiiFcKfl-) tiiti<iTifte^t'<Ri«;i< ^srf^tTSfl^T aopeliant had made obscene advonces tabiished. As dlready mentioned, on the made sdvances towards Sovita in the on beinq unsuccessfui in hiscttempt he which resuited in the dsath of two years on the lifs of Savits by assaultinq msrs admittedly msde inside the house of with a preparation to commit offenca. opinion of this Court, ths Court bebw evidencs wdlsble on record has he!d the described sbovs which is based on proper on record cnd which does not ccll •fo" preferr-ed by the appsilsnt against the ubstsnce, same deserves to be dismissed \,