F‘- w— W WW,W,W m ‘4MAW/g1 200 31mm (WW) ¥\ \'\\ \ \1x W \ WW wW WWW awfm‘mést muraer 0t Kajendra Kumar, sentenoea mm to undergo imprisonment Er life. Case of the prosecution, in brief, that there was a dispute between Rajendra Kumar and his family ow one hand and accused Bhoreial on the other hand regarding grazing o their crops by the cattie. 0n 16-4- 2009fat about 9 p.m. there was s me dispute between Tilu Pando & Amarsai near the house of Amars i, therefore, Rajendra Kumar (since deceased) along with his brother Um sh Kumar (PW-1) and other persons went to that piac‘e in order to persu de them not to quarrei. When the re standing there, however, the accused went to his house, bro ht a battleaxe and attacked the deceased with the battleaxe on his n ck, as a result of which his neck was cut and he died instantaneously. Merg intimation EXP-2 was given n Police Station: Patna by Umesh Kumar, based on that first informatio report EXP-1 was registered. After registering the offence, the lnvesti ating omcer left for the scene of occurrence and prepared the site pl n of the place of occurrence under EXP-3 and site plan EXP-5 was p pared by the Halka Patwari. After the Investigating Officer prepared inquest EXP-7 on the body of the d ceased. Battleaxe was seized from the place of occurrence under Ex. P Body of Rajendra Kumar was sent to Government Hospital, Baikunthpu under EXP-11, where post-mortem was conducted by Dr. D.K. Chikan i (PW-9) 8: Dr. Ashish Karan (PW- 11), they prepared report Ex.P—12 nd opined that cause of death is haemorrhage and neurogenic shock the death was homicidal in nature. dispute stopped, some persons giving notice EXP-6 to the Pancha t i* e , - . j r WW,W€,W m G> A4§~§L/Wt 2006 3mm (1mm) WWW 1z‘'am %afm5n%¥1 As per the report, there was an inc present on the back of neck measr. spinal cord were cut. All the structur cut. Seized articles were sent fo‘I science Laboratory, Sagar, under Ex sent tb‘the doctor who in turn gave r that the injury mentioned in the post- battleaxg in question. After completion of‘investigation, c Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baikunthp the Sessions Judge, Surguja, from Judge, Baikunthpur received the cas The prosecution, inorder to esta lish charge against the accused, examined 11 witnesses. Statement Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in whic against him in the prosecution evide has been falsely implicated in the cr Lalsai in his defence. Learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accuse We have heard Mr. A.N. Bhakta, lear ed counset for the appellant and Mr. D.K. Gwalre, learned Additional Pub ic Prosecutor on behalf of the State! respondent. sed wound (ante-mortam in nature) , ring in 5" x 3". All the nerves and as posterior to cervical vertebra were ' chemical examination to Forensic P-19. The battleaxe in question was ort EXP-1 8A in which he mentioned nortem report may be caused by the ge sheet was filed in the Court of r who in turn committed the case to where learned Additional Sessions on transfer for trial. of the accused was recorded under he denied the material appearing ce and stated that he is innocent, he me. He also examined one witness fter‘hearing counsel for the parties as aforementioned. ’ W h r _ i WW,W,W G>rq¢4 ,. . Wm a1 2005‘ . . . .. .. . . . . XIAHC—78 m m6)‘aé‘ v wwt 200 m m (W) mmm WWW WWW%WWR $WW€¥I WWW 10. Learned counse! for the appel t argued that the fact that the accused went to his house and 5 minutes thereafter. he came with a Farsa, has not been mentioned in the police d ary statement of Umesh Kumar (PW-1). Learned counsel also pointed on some other minor omissions. (tit/Se have perused the statement of Umesh Kumar (PW—1) recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. whi h shows that ail the material facts have been disclosed by this witness ‘ his statement under Section 161 of the Cr?.C. Therefore, we do not nd that there are material omissions or contradictions in the Court evide ce and the police diary statement. Moreover, other witnesses name y, Basant (PW-2), Harbansh (PW-3) and Amarsai (PW-4) have corroborat d the evidence of Umesh Kumar (PW-.1) and from their evidence it is ci ar that the accused went to his house brought the battleaxe and attac ed Raiendra Kumar who was armless. The evidence of these eyewitne es is also corroborated by the evidence of Kailash (PW-5) who has stat in his evidence that on the fateful night when he was at his residence, t e accused came to his house, knocked the door and when he enquired, he disclosed that he has committedthe murder of Rajendra Kushwaha y attacking with battieaxe. On hearing this, he immediately asked the a cused that he has committed a heinous crime therefore, he will not save im and the accused left the place. The evidence of these witnesse is also corroborated by the evidence of Dr. D.K. Chikanjuri (PW-9) wh conducted post-mortem and who has stated that there was a out injury n the back side of neck in the size of 5" x 3" and almost all parts of the n ck were cut. The battleaxe in question 12. 13. $ l n i e WWW m WW§1§QW amif'cmm mm was also examined by the doctor and he gave report EXP-16A in which it was mentioned that the injury which was found on the body of the deceased could be caused by the battleaxe in question. Therefore, there is clear, cogent, ample and legat evidence on record to establish that the accused was the author of the cri e in question and to that extent we do notflnd any illegality or infirmity in the judgment of the trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellan also argued that the accused attacked the sdeceased all of a sudden, a heat of passion and there was no intention to ca‘use the death of Rajendra Kumar. Therefore, offence against the accused does not tr vel beyond Section 304 Part-ll of the I.P.C. learned Additional Public Prosecutor supported the'judgment of the tria Court. In order to appreciate the argu ent advanced by Mr. Bhakta, we have perused the evidence. The evide ce clearly establishes the fact that there was some quarrel near the house of Amarsai where accused ‘Bhorelal was quarreling with one Tilu Pando, t e deceased along with his brother Went to that side and persuaded to °q\u‘arr_el, thereafter, the accused quarreled with Rajendra Kumar, he left that place; went to his house, brought the battleaxe and attacked Rajendra Kumar with the’said battleaxe, resultantly, almost all parts of the neck of Rajendra Kumar were cut, he feil down and died instant neously. Medical evidence of the doctor shows that the force with whic Bhorelal attacked the deceased with battleaxe, almost all parts of his n ck were cut. The attack was made with ‘\such a force that Rajendra Ku ar died instantaneously. ln order to On the other hand, Mr. Gwal r A; a ‘(M mmwmsnmtuwmu;~ 14. 15. 16. i n t E , J XI‘HC—73 am m (W) @7 mam amanéwwia; WWW mmifgétm $afmsné$r 17. Soma ascertain intention of the accuse v weapon used, place of the body force with which the attack was r attacked the deceased with a deadly weapon like battleaxe, that too on the neck with great force as a res injury and died instantaneously. a f ' cause the death of Rajendra Kum or infiltmity in the judgment of the trial Court. A ln the. result, we do not t‘lnd any substance in this appeal, same is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby disn lssed. i Sdl- DHIRENDRA MISI-EA /_, Sdl- \ L.C.BHADOO Judge Judge WW,W,W WT m ceeéegem 200 5\ i, it is to be seen that the nature of the where the injury was inflicted and the nade. ln the present case, the accused ilt of which the deceased sustained fatal Therefore, intention of the accused to ar was writ large and there is no illegality 's’ areweaza .gérmwwmmw L‘Msziw