HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARI-I AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE MR. T.P. SHARMA & HON’BLE MR. RANGNATI-I CHANDRAKAR, JJ. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 567/2007 APPELLNAT Mohan Sahu, S/o Ashamm Sahu, (In jail) Aged about 24 years, Occupation Carpenter work, Address- Shri Ramnagar, Police Station Kanker, District Kanker (C.G.). ‘ RESPONDENT State of Chhattisgarh, through Felice Station Kanker, District Kanker (C.G.) CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374[Zl OF THE CODE OF ‘ CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973. Presentz— Mr. K.K. Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. D.K. Gwalre, G.A. for the State/respondent. ORAL-JUDGEMENT (Paseed on 21/07/201 1) The following judgment ‘ of the Court was_gassed by T.P. Sharma, J:- 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5/ 1/2007 passed by Sessions Judge North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 141/2006 whereby and where under after holding the appellant guilty for the commission of on‘ence of culpable homicide amounting to murder of Babita @Pappi and committing criminal house tress pass and causing injury by knife to Ku. Lalita Sahu, convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 450 & 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced imprisonment for life and me of Rs. 500/ —, in default of payment of nne amount additional rigorous imprisonment for 2 months, rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine amount additional rigorous imprisonment for 2 months and rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without any iota of evidence sumcient for conviction of appellant, Court below has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed an illegality. As per case of the prosecution, on fateful day of 18/6/2006 at about 11:45 A.M. appellant was holding knife went inside the house of Babita @ Pappi (since deceased) and caused repeated injuries by knife to her. PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu, sister of deceased Babita @ Pappi shouted for help and tried to snatch the knife from the appellant, she also received injuries by knife. After hearing the sound for help, neighbours and relatives came then appellant tried to cause injury to himself by knife. At the same time, PWI Shalini Rajput, Councilor of Ward came Whom appellant made extrajudicial confession that he has caused injury to Babita @ Pappi, thereafter she took injured Babita @ Pappi to hospital ll, Where she died. PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu lodged First Information Report Vide Ex. P—4 and Marg intimation vide Ex. P—8. Investigating Omcer left for scene of occurrence and after summoning the Witnesses vide EX. P—23, inquest over the dead body of deceased Babita @ Pappi was prepared vide Ex. P—24. Dead body of Babita @ Pappi was sent for autopsy to Government Hospital Kanker vide Ex. P—9 where PW4 Dr. J.S. Sahu conducted autopsy vide EX. P- 10 and found following injunes: 7 (i) Incised wound over left side of neck of 3 x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (ii) Incised wound 5 c.m. above on left nipple of3 x 2 c.m. (iii) Incised wound below second injury of’3 x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (iv) Incised wound below‘left nipple of 2 x 1 c.m. X muscle deep. (v) Incised wound or lelt costal margin reg‘on of x 1 c.m. x bone deep. i (vi) Incised wound over stomach I Gastium of 1 x ‘/é c.m. x skin deep. n A.P. (vii) Incised wound 5 c.m. below of right nipple of 2 x 1 c.m. x skin deep. (viii) Incised wound over left arm muscle of 1 31 1A c.m. x one deep. (ix) Incised wound over lft unerarm of 7 x 3 c.m. x skin deep. ve 3 b e d (x) incised wound over left sidc 0f back of 4 X 2 c.m. x muscle deep. (Xi) Incised wound over left side of back of 3 x 1 c.m. x skin deep. (xii) Incised wound over left side of waist of 2 x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (xiii) Incised wound below injury No. 15 and below 5 em. downwards of 1 x 1e c.m. x skin deep. (xiv) Incised wound over left side of waist of 2 x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (xv) Incised wound over left thigh of 4 x 2 c.m. x muscle deep. (xvi) Incised wound over left thigh of '2 x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (xvii) Incised wound over right forearm of 2 x 1 c.m. x skin deep. (xviii)Clotted blood present below left mammy gland of 3 x 1 c.m. incised wound in 3rd intestine just to sternal border. (xix) Incised wound over left lung of 2 x V2 c.m. with full of blood and penetration of lungs. (xx) Pericardium at right atrlurn with incised wound of 2 c.m. Injuries were ante-mortem in nature. Mode of death was shock and death was homicidal in nature. Injured Ku. Lalita Sahu also sent for examination vide Ex. P—13 where PW6 Dr. Vijay Usendi examined her vide Ex. P~ 14 and found following injuries:- Incised wound over leit smail fmger of 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 6.111 in number of 2. (ii) Incised wound over palm of 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m in ring mger. (iii) Incised wound over palm in upper side of 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m. (iv) Incised wound over right palm in right small unger of 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m. (v) Incised wound over right palm of right small unger of 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m. (vi) Incised Wound over palm in number of 3 and one wound in center of palm of 1—‘/2 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m. & 1 x 1.4 x 1.4 c.m. Injuries were caused by sharp edged weapon. Appellant was admitted in hospital for treatment on 18/6/2006 and he was discharged on 2/7/2006, his discharge ticket is vide EX. P— 16. Multiple self inflicted injuries were found over the body of appellant. Cloths of deceased Babita @ Pappi'were seized vide Ex. P~21. Blood stained cloths of appellant was seized vide EX. P— 22. During course of investigation, after discharge of appellant he was taken into cpstody and he made discloser statement of knife vide Ex. P—l, same was recovered at his instance vide Ex. P-2. Spot map was prepared vide Ex. P—5. Blood stained and plain soil were recovered from the spot vide Ex. P—7 . Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in \ the Code where he demed the cn‘cumstances appearmg agamst hnn and pleaded Innocence and false unphcatlon m the crane 1n question After affordmg an opportumty of heanng to the partxes learned Sesswns Judge North Bastar Kanker (C G) conv1cted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Mr. K.K. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. D.K Gwalre GA for the State/respondent are heard Judgment Imouqned and record of the Court below perused. Suspicion however grave cannot take place of legal evidence. Conviction ofthe appellant for commission of murder along with other offences is not sustainable under the law. 11. On the other hand, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposed the appeal and argued that prosecution has proved its case beyond all shadow of doubts. Evidence of PW2 Kn. Lalita Sahu, injured eyewitness and evidence of PWI Shalini Rajput before whom appellant has made extrajudicial confession are sufficient for drawing an inference that appellant has caused homicidal death of Babita @ Pappi and also caused simple injuries to Ku. Lalita Sahu after committing criminal house tress pass. Learned counsel, for the State/respondent further argued that evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is sufficient for drawing definite conclusion for commission of aforesaid offences. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, we have examined the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. In the present case, homicidal death as a result of multiple fatal injuries Le. more than 20 injuries found over the body of deceased Babita @ Pappi and simple injuries to PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu has not been 2H substantially disputed on behalf of the appellant on the other hand, otherwise also established by the evidence of PW4 Dr. J.S. Sahu and autopsy report Ex. P- 10 and evidence of PW6 Dr. Vijay Usendi and injuxy report Ex. P— 14. Injury found over the body of appellant in alleged incident has not been substantially disputed on behalf of the appellant on the other hand, otherwise also established by Exs. P— 15 & P— 16 and evidence of PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu specially Para-6 of her cross— examination in which appellant has suggested her that after causing injury to Babita @ Pappi, appellant himself causing injury to his hands. As regards the complicity of appellant in crime in question, conviction of the appellant is substantially based on the evidence of PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu, injured eyewitness 85 PWI Shalini Rajput before whom appellant has made extrajudicial confession. As per evidence of PWQ Ku. Lalita Sahu, at the time of incident, she along with her sister Babita @ Pappi were sitting in front‘of their house, at about 11:40 A.M. appellant came and was talking with his sister Babita @ Pappi then she went inside her house then appellant entered into her house, he was angry and assaulted her sister then appellant immediately came out h‘om the house thereafter appellant again went inside the house £5 and he was holing knife then he caused multiple injuries to Babita @ Pappi, she tried to save her sister but during course of saving her sister, she also received injuries then she shouted for help then their relatives and neighbours came at that time appellant went her house and he also cut his veins by knife then PWI Shalini Rajput came and took injured to hospital by Autorikshaw, during course of traveling, Babita @ Ex. P-4. In her detail cross—examination, she has categorically deposed that appellant has caused 8-9 repeated injuries to Babita @ Pappi by knife. She has admitted the suggestion in Para—6 of her cross- examination that after causing such injuries to Babita @ Pappi, appellant himself has tried to cut his veins of his hands. . As per evidence of PWI Shalini Rajput, after hearing the sound for help, she was coming towards the house of Babita @‘ Pappi, appellant met in a Way and made extrajudicial confession that he has caused injury to Babita @ Pappi and he himself has tried to commit suicide and he was restless then she took injured Babita @ Pappi to hospital. Defence has cross— exami-ned this Witness at length but has not been able 10 to elicit anything in her cross—examination to discredit her testimony. Evidencs of PW2 Ku. Lalita Sahu & PWI Shalini Rajput before Whom appellant has made extrajudicial confession are suliicient for drawing an inference that present appellant has entered into the house of Babita @ Pappi 85 Ku. Lalita Sahu, he was holding knife and caused repeated injuries to Babita @ Pappi resulting into her death. At the time of saving Babita @ Pappi, her sister Ku. Lalita Sahu also received simple injury by the appellant which are suiiicient for drawing an inference that present appellant has caused ‘ injury by sharp edged weapon i.e. knife to Ku. Lalita Sahu and caused homicidal death of Babita @ Pappi. Causing injury to himself by 1mjfe shows his subsequent conduct relating to proving the aforesaid facts under Section 8 of the Evidence Act. Appellant has caused as many as 18—20 injuries by knife including penetrating injury in the lungs shows his brutal act and grave intention for causing homicidal death of Babita @ Pappi. After appreciating the evidence available on record, learned Sessions Judge North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Conviction and sentence of the J @ ,.- appellant is based on credible, clinching and legal evidence sustainable under the law. On close scrutiny of the, evidence, we do not fmd any illegality or iniirmity in the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant. Consequently, criminal appeal is devoid of merits and same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- ’sc’iii’ T.P Shanna RN.Chandl3k3I Judge