,',(9( L'/'llO1' "s@t!< I'SS » APPELLANT: RESPONDENT: !T )f Somarsai, S/o Dhanpat, aged 34 years, R/o Jagdlshpur, Poilce Station Pratappur, Distt. Sarguja, M.P. (nov,' C.G.) Versus State of Madhya Pradesh (now 'hrouah In-charae Poiice l liiuu Chhattisgarh), Chowki Bhatgaon, Police Station Pratappur, Distt. Sarguja, M.P. (now r^ '.^3. {Appea! under Section 374 of the Code of Crimina! Procedure, 1973} Mr. R.K. Jain, counsel forthe appellant. Miss Sangeeta Mlshra, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. t- ORAL JUDGMENT (13-1-2009) i. This appea! is directed against the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 23-2-2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur jn Sesslons Trial No.400/93, whereby tearned Additionai Sessions Judge after hoiding the accused/appel'ant guilty for commission of offence under Sections 452 & 307 of the i.P.C. sentenced hirn to undergo R.l. for two years & pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.i. for five months and to undergo R.l. for seven years & pay a fine of Rs.1 ,000/-, in default of payment ot' fineto further undergo R.l. forten months, respectively. 2. Judgment of conviction & order of sentence is challenged on the ground that v/ithout any ciinching & credible evidence the Court below has convicted & sentenced the appel!ant as aforementioned. 3. i 'have heard learned counsei for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as atso the record of the trial Court. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, isthat on 19-7-93 at about 9 p-m. the present appeiiant alona vi'ith co-accused Nanram committed crimina! I^I^SilSP''' house trespass of the shop of complainant Nandlal and by sharing intention to cause the murder of Nandlal, they caused fatal injuries to Nandlal with sword and ran away from the spot. The F.I.R. was immediately lodged in Police Chowki Bhatgaon vide Ex. P-1 and on the basis of Ex.P-1, registered F.I.R. was lodged vide Ex.P-1A. Nandlal was sent for medica! examinatlon vide Ex. P-4. Five incised wounds were found over the body of Nandlal vide EX.P-4A. One svrford was recovered vide Ex.P-2 from the spot. Piain soil & bioodstained soi! were seized from the place of occun'ence vide Ex. P-3. Spot map was prepared vlde Ex. P-5. 5. After recording the statements under Section 161 ofthe Cr.P.C. and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was fiied before the Court of Judlcia! Magistrate, First Class, Surajpur, v/ho In turn committed the case to the Court of Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, from where leamed Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur, received the case on transfer for trial. 6. In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 ofthe Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them, pleaded innocence and faise implication. 7. After affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additiona! Sessions Judge acquitted co-accused Nanram snd convicted & sentenced the present appellant in the aforesaid manner. 8. Mr. R.K. Jain, iearned cQunsel for the appellant submits that although the appeliant has compteted the jaii sentence imposed upon him, buf 'ne wi!i argue the case on merit. Learned counse! further submits that the evidence of the compiainant is not trustwori:hy and safe to reiy. 9. On the other hand, the judgment is supported on behalf of the Stote/ respondent and it i's submitted that the prosecution has proved the case beyond all reasonable doubts. .10. In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, 1 have examined fhe evidence adduced on behaif of the prosecution. Complainant Nand!a! Gupta (PW-1) has specifically stated in his evidence that on the fateful day the appellant came to his shop and assaulted him with the help of sword and caused repeated injuries over his head & body. When he raised cries, the appeilant ran away. His version is supported by Kishun Prassd Gupta (PW-2) who just came to the s'nop of Nandlai. Nandlai was examined by Dr. ^4ukesh Kumar Jain (PW-4) who has deposed that on 19-7-93 he has examined Na.ndlal and found incised wounds over head, ear, shouider & pa!m, the injuries were dangerous in nature. il. Defence has cross-examined these witnesses at iength, but it hss not been able to elicit anything In their cross-examination to discredit thsir testimony. Evidence of Nandlai is supported by t'ne ocu!ar evidence of Kishun Prasad Gupta (PW-2) and the medical evidence of Dr. Mukesh Kumar Jain (PW-4). Their evidence inspires confidence snd it is trustworthy & sufficient for warrant of conviction against the appeilant under Sections 452 & 307 ofthe i.P.C. 2. After apprecisting the evidence availabie on record, the Court beiow has convicfed & sentenced the appellant as aforementjoned. i do nof find any il.iegality or inflrmity in the judgment of conviction & order of sentence. The appea! is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissea'. _._ _______ Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge