^•v,^::%^^^^ CFooobbebsM • G.A-. •er^^ ^189/(Jaiiy ^.J.P.R. 11/94/2,000 ^Y •;r APPEAL' OF P'RISONER • viviiiorrSenA ^^"&^)", No.........^^,-..^.^..........Nanie.^^.^^..................^.......... Fathc^s name.^^^.^^^.^^...^,;:.,, Residence...,.^^^^.^^^ Xge..... Sentencedto.^^^^ ..On....:.&^^t^..............^,..— ^ Undersection....:^^..^^^^.....by<^^^ It is explained to the prisonerthat if he states or wishes to be represented by legal practitioDer the Appellate Court will not proceed with the base for seyen Uays unless ^e legal practitiooer appears If the legal practitioner does not appear within seven |xys he may not heard at all . Ifihe prisoaer states that he does not wish to be repre- sented by legal practitioner the court may proceed at once with the case and will not be obliged to give a hearing to any legal practitioner who should appear. I Date ofApplication fbr copy of Judgement ........ ... < .................. .y-..:...,.^ 2 Date on which copyreceived .<•.•.••............. ... ...... ..;......;, 3 DateonwhichAppealseQt.....»-^^. .\'\.».\.?\c:\.l5............ ... ......................; ^ 4 Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented or 9,&f- Tes / No ' ^ • '' • No N^me ••^^^^^^V^..^^^ Confinedi^^........^^^..........,.Jail,...^^^^ ^o......^o^..f..^^\^^Dated.........^J^^9^ _\_._^_ ••-fA^LA?—..*••^iw^wy'••^~»^ Forwaxded ta the^HIEg-W^ICIALJ^AGISS&AIE-^ \.< ~'.~:—.—r ^'2 ^^~v;^^^iq^ togatEter'which a copy ofjudgement or order passed intAe&sg4or^v5i?SctTaDS- ;.^ ^^c—- mission to the proper Appellate Court. '•^^\—~?r^ ^c^c\-^^@ \^\^^. ^^^^^^^^- Date of receiptia........... ......;.............office Date of receipt record to accompany the ...... .•H^\j ' :^^ .i^L. "^' ^ '>"]• H-,.- Memo of Appeal to ihe Appellatecourt ........ ................;.....T....^._.^ :^;^^^^9<^.fe'a^ • • »•• No .' ...... ............ .......^k5t«*dS'<*'l»Jt.......—...^4....;....... Forwarded to the "u"y •^^^ ^^M •fV^^ 'J Date of receipt in Appellate Cokrt^M^^^^wf »^ctoA mlt CWKt*-Wl— ( P. T.0. ) ';"^^'' '^7 fe '3^ ^rPTRN, ^IWi^, I^TRT^: ^.......A...:.A^g.^.^;^_ %^rw^ip^: w (^f^^) _ .^Pifepft^'HW^ ^* 'fe^ <fa<^K ^^RiHCT^'' DB: HON?BLE 8HRI L.C. &HADOO AND HON'BLE 8HRI DHI3 ^ENDRA MISHRA, JJ 13.1.2005 Appellaiit Konda @ imder Section 374 (2) of Shri. R,K. Jaiswal, coijinsel for fhe appeUaat. Shri J.D. Bajpayee,. Gjovf, Advocate for the State, Sadanaiid has prefeiTed tliis appeal tlie Crrmiaal Procedure Code through Superintendent, Central \|ail, Raipur beiiig aggrieved by tlie judgment of conviction an|d sentence dated 1st November, 1996 passed by leamed 6th Ac1 Sessions Trial No. 178/96 Judge after holdiag the acc' tlie offence under Section 3 him to undergo imprisonin Sint. Meghai Bai & one Hari Brief facts leaduig 7.2.1996 at about 1 p.m. d @ Sadaiiaad was knockuig Shivcharaii tried to advise haad, same was snatched [dittoual Sessions Judge, Bilaspur m. whereby learaed Additional Sessions ^sed/appellaiit guilty for cominission of |02 oftiie Indiaa Penal Code senteiiced ent for life for comnxittiiig murclers of [charaii, |x> filing of this appeal are that on |irrag tlie day accused/ appellaiif Konda |down tiie goat on thc road, when PW-3 hioi not to do so, accused/ appellaat abused him. Accused/ap^ellaiit Konda was canymg axe m liis |)Y PW-3 aiid was limided over to PW-4 Daras/who is the uncle of|he accused/appellant After some tioie agam accused/ appellaiit ^tarted knockmg down the bicycle of Paiiehayat Secretaiy Haricti aad caiae out from. tiie ho1 -aran aad thereafter, entered his house Lise with an axe, sickle & hammer. He Gi-PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. '^ << '[' "3^r ^IPTf^l, '^'mWTS', 'N^TRT^ ^.....:<&>....&^^12. :'^l?17W(^f3^[^) ?%?%T^ ff3iii?r .."^! caught hold of Meghai Bai l|y hairs, who was comiag out froHi fhe Iiouse of Village Sarpaach ^mt KoshaJya Bai aiid puUed down Iier aiid attacked with axe on liqr neek. On tliis, the villagers coUected tiiere ajld started cryiag, h the house ofSnit Koshalva ?wever, fhe accused/appeUant entered Bai, started breaking Almirali, cot; faii 'ked Paiichayat Secretaiy-Haricliaran, & glass goods aiid also att^c who was srttmg m the hoi|se of Smt. KoshaJya Bai. Thereafler, wheu accused/appellant ca^ae out from. tlie FOQBI, tJiey saw that the accused/appellaiit was 4ommg out from tlie room with axe aiid sickle staiaed witli blood, T|lie villagers went iiiside the room aad saw that Haricharaii was lyi|ig ia flie rooni in fhe injured condrtion haviiig iajuries on liis fac^ Station Masturi. A,R, Qure; injuries of Haiicharaii then| irader Ex.P-6 aiicl as tlie cl<j Hospital, Bilaspur where Iiej ^Rte^ "RR^ff ^ 'fe^'ilN^R ^atfOT^i^ - ' aiid blood was oozing out from fhe iiijunes. The matter was repor|:ed by PW-1 Bhikajn Prasad to PoMce hi, SJ, after rcgisteruig the case (Ex.P- 1) reached to the scene. Inji^red Haricharaii also cajiie to the poHce statiou atoug witli PW-1 Bhjikam Prasad m iojured condifcton aad when A,R, Qurcshi saw th^it fhe bk>od was ooznig out froin fhe he sent hira to tiie Mastari Hospital ^ctor was not available ia tlie Mastziri Hosptial, therefore, Hanchjaran was sent to fhe Govemment died. When A.R. Qureshi reached on the sport he saw that fhe a^cused/appeUant was sittmg tlwre, as the villagers had caaght holxp, of him aiid iiyuries werc also prcsent on liis body, A, R. Qureshi j|repared the Paiichnama of the body of Gi, PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. •^- -g-^ •^nqi^ra, ^t^Ti^, ^TRTgr ...&...,.A..:...8.S' lae- -^ deceased Meghai Bai (Ex, Ij Paaclias of the ViUage aiicl Mastxiri imder Ex. P.10. A. fl w'Esfef^ 'ws^i'? fe^ iN^R '^3i^:^?^r":;::;-;"-: ^9) aiter giviiig notice Ex. P-8 to the plead body of deceased Meghai Bai was sent for post morteni ex^mination to Primary' Health CeB.tre, , Qureshi,S.I. took iato the possession plain soU aad blood staiD.e<p. soil from. the place of iacident under Ex. P-1. One hamnier, sicK body of cleceased Meghai Qai were taken iato possession by A,R. Qureshi. The^eycle was tal^ from the place where Harijs kntfe was recovered, brok^31 spectacle staiiied witli blood, HMT watch of Haricharaii ao.d taken iiito possession un|ler Ex.P-13. Witness Dhaniram atso produced fhe axe which wa^ sriatched from the accused/appellant aad samie was also taken i|ito possession under Ex.P-14, Clothes of accused/appellaiit were P-15 and aj'ter cosDLpletion Sessions Judge, Bilaspui'j Sessions Judge received tti^ Learaed Additioiial Sfc Je aad Lungi, which were lynig uear ihe [en in.to possessioii under Ex.P-12 and bharmi was attacked a blood staiiied bne Gaoicha staiaed with blood were also taken iiito possession under Ex. of iavcstigation charge sheet was filed agaiast acciised/ appellaiit ^a tlie Court, of Judicial Magistrate FiTSt Class, Bilaspur, who in 'tuni committed fhe case to leai-ned froin where leanied 6th Additioiial case on transfer, ^ssions Judge after fraxaiiig tlie charge rccorded fhe prosecutioii e^idence aiid also recorded the statement of accused/appeUaBt und€|r Section 313 of Cr.P.C. ia which fhe accused/ appellant denied t|ie prosecution evidenceaiidstated tih.at he is ianocent, After hear|ng tlie argiiinent of leamed Additional Gi-PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—.50,000. ^i^rw^N ^,^ -3^ ^fraMq, ^t^l^, ^TTC^ ..Ss..-..A..:..g..S.^. •^I^^^ (^t^^). ICTW^ftil^i^i -^ PubUc Proseciitdr aiid couil Additional Sessions Juc| accused/ appeUaat as We liave heard leaml R, K, Jaiswal aiid leamed ou behalfoftlie State, As far as the qu^ HaricabLaraa are beixig for the accused/appeUanl ofherwise, as per evidence the postniorteBi on 08,02 . stated tliat he saw fhe ni^ body, face, near eyes aad o^ right maxillaiy bone was fcj bone up to bone^ deep nuz^ aii tacised wound below th^ iacised wound ia tlie size. of 2X/2 xlxl/2 cm on fhe opcniag tlie skuU bone wa^ present MaxiUaiy Boue aacl cause of deatli was Biorteia report Ex, P-26, PW} ou 8,2,1996 lie was workioji aad on tiiat day at about 1 the body of Meghai'Bai. T^ .^Rlfa^^ W-?^f'? fe^ ifa^k -^^rf&H^i^r': -: l.sel for the aceused/ appeUant, leamed |ge coirvicted aiid sentenced tlie mentibned above. i^d counsel fer accused/appeUaiit Shri G|)veramenf Advocate Shri J. D. Bajpayee i^stion of deafhs of/ Meghai Bai & conjsidered as homicidal, leaiiied coiinsel has uot dispiited this iact Even o|T P.W-10 Dr. P. C. Gupta, who condiicted J1996 on tlle body of Haricharaii, has ^iltiple iacised wounds prcsent on tlie |i account of that eye wall was also cut, |uud cut, iacised wound on tlie niizzle |le bone was found fracturcd, there was ^ eye ia the size of 4cia x ICBI, aaofh.er ojf 6x 13^2 cni, one aiiofher iacised wound stoi^iach, tlie nitestuie was coBiHig oiit On found fractured, haeiaatoina was also aj^d nuzzle bones were fouiid fractured Iiead injuries. He prepared fhe post 12 Dr. Mohan Ottalwar has stated tliat /7orkio|g ia tlie Piiinmy Healtii Centre, Masturi ..00 a.m. he conducted pbst mortem on liere was axi iiicised wound on tlie neck^ Gi; PRJ—FS/350— 12/2000—50,000. ^^ ^T^m, ^^T^, -tora^; _....^..l.:.ISf.l^....... .»,...^.o.,-.——o...^—.o ^i^i^i'^ro ^' \:- •w^ ("^t^^) -£T of 1 mcli x V2 mchx % mcli ^1t^!f xi^R ^,^H^7^?": , which was clotted witti blood. There was another lacerated wour^d QU the occlpital region which was of 3 iach x 2 inch. The occipitjal bone was fracti^ mjuries were caused by shai-p edged aiid hard weapon/ Cause of deatJi was excessive bleeclid evidence of fliese two doctc g aiid shock on accoimt of tlie head mjuries. Post mortem repoijt is Ex. P-31. Therefore ia view of the >rs and eyewifa^sses FW-2 Koshalya Bai, PW-4 Daras, PW-6 Raijaeshwar Ri'asad & PW-8 Vasiideo,if stands proved fhat accused|/appenan.t attacked Meghai Bai and Haricharaii wlth sharp edged|& hard weapons i,e. axe aild knife, as a result ofwhich death were 4 aad Haricharaii were hoinicidl Now, comiiig to tlie qii^ appeUaat ia comniission of i^ 'aused, fherefore, death of Meghai Bai al in nature. bstion of mvolvement of the accused/ ^irder df Meghai Bai aiid Hmicharaa. In this case PW-4 Daras, 47ho is aa evewitoess aiid uncle of deceased, has stated ia clear 12,00 noon when Iie retziml Shivcharaa was briiigiag tlie terms tliat on tiie fateful day at about ?d to his hoiise he saw tliat PW-3 goat of accused/appeUaat Konda. He handed over the goat to the w|fe of accused/appellant, at tliat time accused was going to his hoijise. Witness PW-3 snatched the axe from tlie accused/appellant a^id gave him aiid m tum he lcept tliat axe ia the house of one J^nakram. When accused/appellant reached m front of his ho^se he saw that acc-ased/appeUaat started knockmg down th^ bicycle of Panchayat Secretaiv Haricharan aad tiiereafter, a(}cused/appeUaatwent to his house :/ Gt;PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. -^^ ^n^T^rq^ '®^Ti^,"f^TRiy (D.A-.xs-A^ .%^r^T^w ^ir -c L-..- •^^^^ (1^3a^) ^^i^t^^3??^i aiid came out witb axe/haijamer aad sickle, at that tmie Megliai Bai was retumiag froni acciised/appeUaDLt caught hj aad attacked her witli ax^ viUagers collecfecl and stej appeUaiit entered flie liou^ breakitig AImirah, cot, faa aj}id glass goods, at tliat time Paa.cliayat Secretaiy Haricharaii, was ^ tiiat the accused/ appellaat axe aiid sickle staiaed witli tlie rooni aad saw that S< iajured condition, mjuries | HaricharaQ. was taken to fh^ is iione else tlian the zui^ Prasad, who has also st^ Meghai Bai with an axe. accused/ appellant attacked tliese witaesses is also corro] As per iiiedical evid^ Mohaii Ottalwai' (PW-12) ar^ the correspondiag uijuries ~\\\ has not been able to brozii ^l^ife^h '^TR^yf if fe^ ^fe^R ^ ^SH ^lt^I-- fhe Iiouse of Sait. Koshaiya Bai, old of her by haurs, puUed down her on her neck, 'On seeiag this, fhe rted ciying, on fbis the accused/ of Srat. Koshalya Bai aiid started ittiag ia tlie TOOBI. Thereaiter, he saw was comiag ozit of fhe room witli tlie blood. Tlieifeafter, they entered iiito ^cretary Haricharaa was lyiag ia asi werc prcsent on his iace. Then, ; hospital wliere he died. This witaess 'le of accused/ appeUant Konda aad evidence of tliis witness staiids corroborated by PW-6 Raiaeshwar ted tliat accused/appeUaiit attacked PW-8 Vasudeo has also stated that Meghai Bai witli an axe. Evidence of borated by PW-2 Koshalya Bai. ace of Dr. P.C. Gupta (PW-10), Dr. d postmortem report (Ex.P-31 & P-27) hich we.re stated bv these witaesses ui their oral evidence were foiJLi^d on tlie bodies of Meghai Bal aiid Haricharaii, lu cross-examifciation of these witaesses tlie defence ;ht an.yfh.in.g on record, which makes Gt;PRJ—FS/350-i2/2000—50,000. <^-~ -3^"?qra^?, '^NFI^, t^TRT^ ..^.^.:s^^...^ -^ -^T^? (^f^^M) evidence of fhese witnesse there is no cross-exaniia^ acciised/appellant or fh^ heiaous crnne ui a heat Bai, who was Sarpaiich oi evidence of fhe eyewitD.essc on tlie spot. She has also coiniag towards his house Haricharan, but he had no in tlie room, She furtlier that tibie accused/ appellajit Therefore/ in view oJ tlie prosecution has been accused ia attackiag aad and Hancharan beyoiid rea LeaiTied coiuisel fo prosecution has not been crime aiid it is not UH( accused/appeUaut coiiiBiit rhyme aiid reason. But advaiiced by learaed set-tled law tliat where tj evidence of evewitnesses tti motive, sufBciency or iasu major role aad when clear| ^?^fa^iN al7p:i^f ^f fe%l <N^R i5'3t(^H3H^? |s unreliable aad untnisbvorthy ratlier ^tioii iadicatin.g any imiocence of fhe ^t accused/ appellant coinmitted the of j)assion or losing sense. PW--2 Koshalya tlie Village, has also corroborated the |s and stated tliat she was also present [stated that tlie accused/ appeltaiit was jliaviiig axe iti his haad and she wanied ft realized tlie seriousness aad remaiae.d jstated ia paragraph-3 of her stateBient |attacked Meghai Bai with. an axe, atoove evidence of fhese eyewitaesses, feble to estabUsh the uivolvenient of the [comnuttiiig tlie miirder of Meghai Bai Isonable doubt. ji' tlie accused/ appeUant ai'gued that able to prove the inotive behuid tlie jlerstao.clable tliat why a p^rson like [tlie murder of tevo persons witliout any ^e are iinable to accept fliis argument cou^isel for the accused/appeUaiit It is |ie prosecutlon case is based on the len the existenee or non-existence oftlie insii|Biciency of raotive wUl not play szich a |cogent legal evidence ofeyewitnesses is Gt; PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. ^•^^' -S^ ^?raM:s[, •^NTTS, fN^TR?y ,.&..;.^.:.€s^2. •^^T?^ (^f^^) 'i^lT^R ^ft^ asiit^ iavolvefcaent Thereft^re ^liid available showiiig absence of Biotive becoines 1 The ofher argunieiit |a weapon of offence was accused/ appeUant, committiag the miirder of Fv| As mentioned abov^ iacident Le, FW-4 Daras, P| and PW-2 Kaiishalya Bai that the weapons of offen^ Investigatnig Ofiicer A.R. prQduced by Dhamrajxi, w| appeUaiit was stained witli uuder Ex- P-14 and tlie deceased Harichai'an was mider Ex. P.13 bv fhe coBimitted. In view of recoveiy of weapous of Shiveharaii PW-3, regaixlii^ acczised/appellant aiid we do uot fmd aiiv substaa(t TIierefore, we are of of conviction recorded by does not suffer feoni aav the cogent, reliable aiid tn^ ^^sf^W'l 1^1:?^f 4.'fe^>:I^I^R '^'^fiiH^n^T' of tlie accused io. cnoie then jHTelevaat. idvaa.ced by learaed counsel is that no recovered from possession of the he cannot be Iield guilty for leghai Bai aad Hai'icharan.. fhat tliere ore evewitiiesses to flie ]N-6 Rameshwar Prasad, PW--8 Vasudeo it has cleaiiy come ia. fhe evidence were recovere.d from the spot. PW-9- Qureshi stated that one axe was |iich was suatched from tlie accused/ jblood and it was talcen mto possession |cnife which was used for attackmg also recovered froni tlie saiue rooin ^tigating Officer where tlie offence was of iDLvestigating officer regardmg [^ncc, fhe ev^^ of Daras PW-4 & i^ snatehing ofweapon of ofieuce frora •<t>very of saixie by Investigatfon Officer, ^e ia tlie argUBients of leamed counsel. |he considered opinioii that titie findnig tearae.d 6th Additional Sessioiis Judge 'gallfy or mfiroiity, same is based on |stvvortliy evidence of eyewitaesses mid luve^ti evitlence offencc, rec<pver}7 ille Gjt.PRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. ^^T^it^r.^^N' ^J'- Roshan/- '^pn^pj, :^t^Tf%>, ^iray 2 ^ '^i^itqw.(^t^^i) I^ISW'^^^i^? we do 'iiot find auy reasoi. court. The way in whi<j niurders in quick successi^ aad lookiiig to fhe weaponl that tlie accused/ appellanlj intention to coiTimit flieir BJ In the result, we do saiae is Uable to be disnus^ Consequently, M.C| No.4539/04 &lso stand Sd7- L.C, Bhadoo Judge ^s^iQi^h-'WS^f'^'fe^ <R^i< f '^'^tfTO^Tt^T to diSer froni tlie findiag of fhe trial ^h accused/ appellaiit conmiitted two >B. and that too Qffwo ianocent persons s ofoffence used tn crime, it establishes attacked tlie deceased persons with aa urder. not find ao.y substaiice ia tliis appeal, >ed aiid accordingly, it is dismissed, c.P. No. 1760/04, 3284/04 & I.A. dismissed* Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge