a-He—78 'S^ ^ww^^ aTil+i'Kj, (s)(,'>|y^< *<INdl *H|cb W^ 200 an^r •qgw (lyf'l«i<T) sn^r^fyiN '(TaH ^TT^T sh*l TOiiWdfsa aii^r HIGH COURT OFlCHHAmSGARH BIUUWUR CRIMIKAL AtfPEAL N0. 316 OF 2001 DIVISION BBHCH BMI HOH' APPBUAN're 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. RE8POBDBHT Tiw^ri, Preseat Mr. Yashwaat cozinscl for ttie accused/aj Mr. U.N.S.Deo, A Stete/respondent. cfti<iI<n<ihT ^w^i'ifJ^e^ {.raf^K ^aifgiiaii^r l£8HRI L.C. BHADOO. & LB 8HRI DHnOBm»lAMI8HR&. JJ Romcnafh, S/o. Samedas Satnami Agpd 44 years Rajakumar S/o. Samedas Satnami,. Aged 26 ycars Lakhan Lal S/o. Romeiiafh Satnasu Aged 18 ycars Bharat, S/o. Romcnatli Satnaini, . Aged about 23 ycars >.Shatrughan S/o. Romenafh Sataami Aged about 25 ycars AU R/o ViDs^c Gaitara, P.S. Palari, Distnct Raipur (C.G.) Vacawt State of Chhattisgarh 4ri, Advocate with Shri Atok Pandey, i^peUatits. Iditional Public Prosecutor for fhe XI-HC—78 3n^r?ii'friw d'nsi^rg^N; ^SSf '<||<||<?»<l, ®r{1(H<|^,(sj<?ii|y^< ~^!ff?f! *^1* 3n^?T ^VK (^Syyc) 's^iRR'gfN .aii^r -2-- <*i<<f<-i'ii1-i ^TII^ -if.fest tfSre^ ^'siRnaii^r ORAL JlUDGMBNT (25tt ^uae 2007) Per L.C. Bhadoo, J This appeal is duected against ftic judgiacnt of conviction and order of sentencc dated $0fh March 2001 passed by leamed Second Additional Sessions >Ji|tdgc, Batoda Bazar, Distt Raipur in S.T.No.242/2000 whereby le^rued Sessions Judgc after holding fhc accused/appeDaats guilly|for coiiunissioa offhc ofiFence uader Sections 148,302/149 ofthe IpC, forconunittingthc murdcrofone Prem Das @ Fagua, scntencc|l each of fhe accuscd/appcllants to undergo nnprisoutDent for life^ and to pay a fine of Rs. l,OQO/- and two years RI and to pay a fin^ of Rs. 300/- Bespectively, in defa.ult of payment of fiinc to ftufhe^ undeiyi R.I. for onc year and one laonfh RI. I 2. Case of the prosecutio|a, in bricf, is that P.W.-6 Ramayan fafher of deceased Prem Das|@ Fagua lodged a report Ex. P-15 ia poUce Ou^)ost GiroudpiMJ,) P.S. Patari to fhe effect fhat on ,! 08.04.2000 his son Prem Dai left the housc at about 5.W a.m. tfor Panlchati pond atoi^ witti fh^ buffaloes. At about 6.00 a.ia. son of DiAahi Das Satnami cam.c fand informed 'hvm fhat Us son Prexn Das has been attacked in f|ie field of Mangal Bai by Romenafh, Ram Kumar aad otticrs a4d asteed Wm (Ramayau) to go. On GRPRJ— FS/246—2/2007"'^ 50,000. XI-HC—78 3n^T?iT'f^iN? ^T'STTi^T^N? :3'sq'"4i<iirt^, ®Ti1yig,Rirti'yy •WTCW WW^? •M^T IR% (1pfg?^) ^Riiw^f^Tai^r •3, "^t, 200 q>l'<i<1<i)-f^Wdl if.test ^i^R ^•3iRFF3)]^I hearing this, he aloiig •vriQ^. Gancshu Satoaxni fcft for the placc of| occurrence and saw tha); body of his soa was tying in fhc • agricultuial field of Manga| Bai. Thcre was a cut mjiuy on fhe neck ; aud lot ofblobd came out ^ftfae iajury. His son faas been attaclsied by Ronienafh, Ram Kumat, Bbarat, Lakhau and Shatrughaa who are residcnts of viBagc Ga^tra, with Tdbbal & Fcasa and committed his murdcr. Aftcr sceing 4ie dead body, he in&rined the villagers aloag wiUi. Upsarpanch. 4ftler rccciyixig (his report, fhe S.H.O. of PoUcc Station Palad r^gistered fhe offence under Sectfon l47> 148,302/149 of the Investigation Officer, Oui |IPC agaiast the accused pcrsons. The ^ Post Giroudpuri teft for fhc place of occurrence. After giving 40tlce of Ex.P-5 site plEin of Ex.P-6 vias prepared by Halka Patwa^i. Plam soil and btoodstained soil, onc bamboo fedfaf and one slfeel tuniblcr of dcceased Prem Das was taken iato possession 6xjSfSt fhe place ofoccurrence uader Ex.P/7. Accused/Appellant iiame^- Romenafh white in police custody, y^K memoraadum. of Ex.P-8 ifegardmg Farsa aad in pursuance ofthat, same v/as seized under Jpx.P-10. Accused/Eqipellaat namety Ram Kumar gavc laciaorandu^a of Ex.P-9 and in pursuance of fhat one Bamboo lcdhi was seiatd under Ex.P-ll. CIothes of accused Romenath wereseized udder Ex.P-12. Clofh.es ofRani Kumarwere seized under Ex.P-13. ^|IeIg iatiinatiDn of Ex.P-14 was giveu|by Ramayan-fathcr offhe djsceased, Body ofdece^scd Prem Das -yas scat for post mortem escajminatton imder Ex.P-22 to Primary Heatfh --J&^. GRPRJ— FS/246—2/20flT^ 50.000. ^s=i :WvW{,^ms, f^my '*^w<'ir ishHw ^ 200 sn^r 'raq? (1i?f3^ti) _'si^r.3Br<^TRr WTOT^I gitli^ 'reiraT'ofOT'iHi^r -s. ^raferah wRff if fect 7te?R ^arfgitsir^ Centre, Baloda Bazar where Dr. jR.S.Tiwari (P.W.-7) conducted fhe post niorteia on fhe body of Prei^i Das and opiaed that tfae cause of was shock because of ^ccessivc IifimorAagc and cervical iajuiy. The sam.e was causcd|by hard aad sharp objcct. After coiapletion of investigation, cl(arge sheet -vas filcd agatast the accuscd/appeUants ia thc C<^urt of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baloda Bazar who |ni tum committed fhfi case to the Sessions Judge, Raipur flx>in wjtiere fhe learaed Secoiid Additional Scssions Judge, Batoda triaL reccivcd fhe casc on trausfer for 3. The prosecution in order|to estabUsh fhe charges against the accused pcisons examiaed 12 Iwitacsses. Statement offtie acctised persons were recorded under pcction 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which fhey denied the niateriaL |appcariBg agamst them ia fhe prosecution evidcnce aad pk£^.edmnocence. 4. Afltcr hearing couasel for the respective parties, tearncd Additkinal Sessions Judge c^nvicted and sentenced the accuscd persons as aforesaid. f ^ S'. We have heard Mr. Ys(sbwaat Tiwari along •wifh Mr. Atols: Pandey on behatfoffhe appe^lauts aad Shri U.N.S.Deo on bcbatfof fhe State. GRPRJ—FS/246— ,000. EI fffliin^ J!'^I5T^!iF wr aii^r'^i)j^ 3^ ^CTc^j^f^^ {^TOy 'WIW WTW 3<i^1ra^ (13?^^r) '^wwnfsggn^r -s'- WI. 200 ^l*^'WRff ^ft^ tft^K ^affiiHsn^i S Haviag heard counscl fof- fhe partfes, we have perused the record. In order to connect the| accused peisons with thc criiuc ia question, fh.c prosecutiou has ^xamiDed P.W.-6 Ramayaa-fafher of fhe deceased as eye witncss, JP.W.-8 Kumar, Son of Dukalu Das who is said to have infonue4 Raniayan about the attack being naade by the accused personsfand P.W.-3 Ganeshu who had been examined and has said to hav^ accoinpanied Ratnayan. 7. P.W.-8 Kuinar, who iti|fonned Rainayan about fhe attack, when he was examined, ha^ stated that he has no kn.owlcdge about fhe iacidcnt as he has hot seen how Prein Das dicd aiad who attacked Imn. He has tumefl. hostile aad has not supported tite prosecution case. P.W.-3 (Gaaeshu has stated fhat he kaevr deceased Prein Das. Thc a(x:used persons are residents of his village and fhat he saw de^id body of Preia Das in the fieM of Mirchu near fhe pond. Wl^en he heard fhe commotion i& the viBagc, he teft for fhe villafec atoxig wifh Ramayan-feifhcr of fhe deceased and saw fhe deafl. body. Blood was oosang out of thc mjuiy on fhc shoulder. R^iaswan-fetthier of fhe dcceascd laised cries. He lias fi-urther statedltiiat&ther and brofher offhe accused were luurdcred by Pteiu betwcen the parties. Das tfaerefore there was animositff ;-,7^;;,J, ;:.,„, GRPRJ— FS/24&—2/20 d-c^i '<<|<)K?><<, (jiTflyiti, f^roy ^Wvll *W* ^ an^r ira% ('13?f3^?r) sn^i^r'tate' ^naiRW a?m? l^nw^fOTan^r wfe*T-Ri*Rif^ fei<a <^^i,- i?3jfipT3n^r 8. P.W.-6 Raiaavan. 'bas stfeted that Prein Das had been inurd^red. Romcnath, Ram. K^unar, Shatn^hau, Bharat and Lakhan Satnanal who arc reside4ts ofviUage Gaitra had comnutted the laurder of Prem. Das wifh Tat>bal & Lathi. He raised cries ia fhe viclnity whereupon the Sarpac vicinity caine to see the bodv of I ch, Paach and residents of the has son. There was a cut injuiy on tfae shoulder of Preui Das. He ij?as going to fhe pond at about 6- 7,00 a.ni., at fhat tiine tae heard persons were nuuung away afl fhc cries of Prein Das- 'save,save'. He took ftie bufifaloes for graztfig in thfi field. Hc saw that thcse er attacldng his son. Thcre is aa improvement in the Court cvid^nce of this •witaess. In fhe Cozut evidencc this pcrson has depo^cd as ifhe was eye witoaiess offhe iacident where as in the msr^ m.tinaation and First Infonnation Report todgcd by him, it has t)|een inentkfned fhat ia fact he was informcd by P.W.-8 Kumar that|his spn is beiog attacfeed and wfaca he reachcd on the spot hc SEI^F hin< in injurcd <x)ndition, m fhe Firat Information Report hc l^s not stated anythiag fhat he saw fhe accused pcrsons standin^ at thc placc of occurtence. The cvuiencc of fhis witaess js wh^lty uiLreUablc and does not inspire coafideace aad fhcre is no ottter evidence in order to coxmect fhe accused peraons with the criiD|c iu question. Even thou^h oae axc is said to have been recordcd 4t fhe instaace of Roiaenafti and one lafhi at ftie insta&ce of accus^d Rana Kumar but there is no FSL report showing that the sffin.e; fwere stained wiffa huniaa blood and GRPRJ—FS/246—2/: uoo. sii^r.^ift'iiT wn sii^i'anm? ^. 3^^"4i^i^, giTftens^ ^roy MWvtf shlljcb ^I. 200 sn^ynra^ ('pf^a??) ^IRR ^lfct 3(1^1 —~l- ••*lll?l41^ XIW'fif faii) ip^^K' '^affipTsn^r that too, thc blood group of|deceased Prena Das. In the Flrst In&rmation Report, it hss lijeen nientioned fhat the accused persons attacked Preiu Das w|Lfh Tabbal and Fcvsa whereas axe has bcen recovered at fhe inst4ncc of accascd Romenafh. There is no ofher endencc in order to c^naect fhe accused persons wifh fhe criiae ia question. Therefore w|s are of fhe considered opinJDn that fhe findiag of thc trial Court c<|>nvictuig fhe accused/appeHaats for coDMaission of fhe offence un4er Section 148, 302/149 ofibc IPC caxmot be sustaincd as thc| sanie is not based on aay tegal admissible eviden.ee. The judg^aeut of fhc trial Co'urt is passed on the sunnises and coiycctures. | In tUc resiilt, fhe ap sentencc imposed upon fhc ofFencc uader Sectton 148, thcy are acquitted of the namefy Roinenafh, Ram. Ki for inore tfaan. scven vears Bhaiat & Shatrughan are Therefore fhev are directed in aav other case. ;al succecds. The conviction stnd atx;used/appeBants for coxnmission of 3p2/149 ofthe IPC are set aside and charges. The accused/appellants aad Lakhaa Lal are in detention rhcre as accused/appeBants nanidy detention for niore ttiaa Six vears. be set forffa at liberty if not rcqlured Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge GRPRJ— FS/246—2/2007 — 50.000. DHIRENDBAMISHRAI Jndge ^l 'l y r