HISH COURT OF CHHATn-S©ARH Cr!mingl_-4pPcalN",815 of CORAM; 1-IOK"BLE "AR.T.P.SHARMA & MON'BLE /AR.R.L.JHANWAR, JJ. 1 APPELLANTS 1. .Wada'/i Monaad S/o Kosa. aoed cbout 40 ' (irsjailj years. 2. AAQdoyi AGyntu^ S/o Hand<s, c.9CTd isbout e:H years. 3., • MGCJQVI Dsycx. S/o boti. QQ^ci sbcut 2B years, 4. M<ldQyi Bh!tn&. S/o Rc^do.. QLQ^CJ oibout 22 years, Al! abo'i'e. are residents of viliage- Baranour. P.S. Kirandui, Oistrict- &antevuada (Bastar) C.S. Ve-rsus RESPON&ENT State of Chhcttisgcr-h through P.S- Kinmdui, District-Dantewoda (BasTarj C.Q. fCRMINAL APPE.AL UN&ER SECTZON 374 f2'i OF THE CODE OF CRIW.INA.L PftOCEDUftE, 1973) Present'- Mr. -Akhil AQrawai counse! for* tha a"De!k<nts. Mr'.M.P.S.Bhatia. OeDuty ©oyemment Advocate for the 5tate/respondent. OML ("Passedon 2nd December, 2009) Ths judgmsnt of the Court was dsllvered byT.P.Shflrma. J.:- 1. By this appeal, the appe!!cL"ts have chailenged the lagality ar«ipropriety of the Judgn'ent of coriylction ^ ordsr of sejntei^ce dct^d 10.T.2002 possed by the Second AdciitinnQl Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur (Bastar), m Sessions as Case No.66/2002 whereby aid whereunder ieamed Sscond Additiona! Sessions Judge after holding tiie appelio-nts guilt*/ for commissio" of offence punishcble under Ssction 302/34 of the Indian Psnal Code sentenced them to undergo ificprisonment fo>* !ife. '• \ S. -Jijd-i3^wytt ^ ordsr crs chcllsnfied on th^ Qround thot Without th^rs bei^ onv cI^chi^Q o^d cr^dibls.gvidsncs. 'Hrts Court below hets coinyict^d o^d S03^tsnc<5d th^ Q|3p^Hont3 as <3fors!?i£?stl<?n€;ci o^d thsrsby coii^rnitted ;!!egQ!'ty- 3. Case of the pr'osecution, In brief, Is that en tiie fateful day of 24-10.2001 ct Qbout B ?.n^. the dscs^sssd AAsdoyi HsHdc wos Drsssnt yn his hou^ accusgd ^Acdcyi ^ayatu ca^se to h^ house ar1d dst?t£^dsd Lcipda (intoxfcant liquid) for dancer. Other" co-occused namely, Madav.i Bhimc, Madovi &eya GMd AAG'd^yJ Mny!Qdu yysrs <tci?iQi?i^ In his courtvcsfd, 'Hifiv tstl ths dsc$<'xssd thct h$ hcd ifi-dulQsd i?i witchcr&ft n^d cDD^Horlt M^dsyi AcEystu QSSQiiltsd the deceassd by bumLnQ pi^c^ of ^ood- Accused Bh$^!?trt o'nd HandflE ccu^ht hold his hQ^ds ^nd le'^s isnd accused Ma^gdu Qsso-ulte-d him by k?i'f^ ovsr his nec'K ond honds. Again Mcdavi .4cyatu cssautted hin' by burncig piecs of wood. Hss wife Snit.AAcdavi Hidnifi (PW-1) tried to iR+ervsne and •n+er'cept, then aiccus^cj Mon^du hos QJ^O asssuttsd h^r. De^^assd fell C^OWH ow 'ti^e floor and died ins+cinta'teously. S?nt-Madoyi Hid'ne p'W-1) has 'nforined ths 'ncident to Kawosi Buchhi. Panchayat was conyened, the" she iodged the rsQort vlde Ex-P/1 rtt DoHcs stQtioin KJrc^duL 35 ktio?Tts-tfflr QWCIV fro?tt ths p!aclft of inc'de^t. Msr^ mt^otio^ Was r*ecoFtd^d y'de Ex.P/3. Tpy'ssti^c.ti^^ officsr Drocsed^d for th^ sc^^s of occurr^ncs. Aftsr sy??lmc'nEyii1^ ths wh^sssss fBx.P/12Y i^Guest oy$'A ths dsod boch/ of Iti^ dsc$c*s^;^ WQS QytsS€3.r'sid. v^ds Ex.P/13. Dccs-s'^sd ^/'\G.dfs.yl Hc^dc weis sent for i?!<scl'ciil exQn'ination- He was e.xani'ned by &r'-Kuwar* SOU+CID (PV/-5) ca'id found thrs.g |5ijfjri$3 oy^r thc. boQ'y of thc dffi<^cr^d. Dsod body wcis sent for' aytoDS"1/ to Pri^arv Hs-oJl^i C^nt3ft®- KirQridi3!'vid^ Ex.P/lOA. .Autossv wos conducted by Dr-Kun'iar' &outa""t (PM/-5) vide Ex-P/10 and found ebr'asion over his left fciy%ctr?^. eoritusiori over' rieiht forscrTn. "^cised wou^d over .<» rig.ht fronta! regio" of 4 cm, x i cm. and incised wound over hls neck. Cau.! of dssth cs a resuit of head injur'y cnd dsn1+i was homicidal i" nature. ^ccused wsre a!so ctssnu!tsc! Mcd<xyf JQQQ.. H^ was also exo^ined by &r.Kumar' 6outam fPW-5) yide Ex.P/9 and found +hr«e injurie-'s over his body. The 5'ccu.sed wsrs takfin lnt<? custody. .^ccused AA<Trj^lv' ^aystu r?tQ<i£ disciosure stateinent reicting to burning piece of wood y'de Ex.P/3, sa-"i& WQS recove'v.d yide E>;.P/7. Accused Madnvi Mcwgdu rpade disciosur'e stQtement '•eiating to knife v'de Ex.P/4, sains 'A'as r'ecovered yide Ex-P/6. BioodstoJnsd <oil ar?d pls!^ soll wsrs r$G£?ysr$dfroin ths s@ot vlds Ex.P/^. 4. StQt€m^ntsof th^ wifiss^es wsrt<£ l<scofd€'dynd^r Ssction 161 of ths Cods of Cr'iT'i^cJ Pfocsdurs, 1973 fhsiaei?toft%En ref'srred to <2S ^"hs Cods') Qiftd cftsr> c^^olstio?i clf iny€5tl/iotio?i; cha?'£ss sh^st wcs fil^d !ri 1^e Court of Ch'ef Judic'a! Mo9'str'.ate, Dantewadc, who v. tur" com'T'it+ed 1+is case to ths Court of ttls Ss'5sio?i5 -Judo^. ^JcQdGlDu^ f^om whers Second .Addttioy?ct Ssssions Jud§sr,Ja^dGipur r^csiysd ths ^3me on tr^n^fer for triQL 5. X" ord^r to Qroy^ Ifis oullt of ths cIrccu5ed/s3DDell''2Hts, ti^s srosecution e.xc.'r!!l'>sd as ifony "s 7 witnesses. States'ent of the accused/appe!!ants were afso rscordsd under Section 313 of the Code where they denied the cir'cumstances appe"rir<g against then* ond claiined innocence and false i!!ip!icatio". 6. Lear'ned Sscond Additioncl Ssssions Judge after affording opportunity of hs^r'in^ to the parti^s^ cci?iyictsd and sgntsnc^d ths cxccfj<€d/Gppel!/xyitsas oforsn'sntioned- 7. We hoye hsafd ^Mf.Akh'ii Ags'awal, counsel fot' 't'i.e oppellants and Mr.AA.P.S.Bh"stln. DeDutv ^oyer^n^e^t Adysccite for' ths 5tat€/f''ecoond^nt a"d DST'ussd th®.'udQ^ent 'wpyansd n^ <sl.so record of the Court b@!ow 8. LsQrlyied coun^el aDD€<irti'io for' the csnD<2li<t^t subn^its th<it the- eyidence adduced o'fl bshalf of the Dro^ecution is not worthv reiicyiGe sufflcie?it for* wnr'ronting conyiction. ^^ /^*^ <te>«' 9. On the other horsd^ Igarn&d Sto-ts cou?>ise;l suQ&or'ted the: iud?i^€-yit imDUQP.^d. 10-1n ordsr to appreciate the c<?ritentioi!"!S of the pGr't'es, we have exQmined th's eyid^'nc®QyQiiQbl^ o?i rccord. Zn ths p^5%nt coss, S!7lt.Mncioivi Hid?ns (PV/-1) i.s)ife of the deceased Mcsdav' Handa has spec'fically deposed that , T \ all the appeHants ccif.e aid demanded Lsnda and o" the ground of dsspute '. nf witchcraft, appeilant Mada'" Aoyatu assauited her husband by burning p'ece of wood. .Appeliants Bheema and Ha"da caught ho!d hands ond legs of h^r husbQ^d snd <^)selli2rlt Mrt?iQdu clsssult£d hit^ by knifs. Zn hcr dstail cross-e.'K.an'inat'on, she has specifically dsposed thct the appellaits are the t^srsoiis who hciy®coiused i?liurv to h©r'husbond G?ld whe?" she triad to p,-^,-.-..^ ^-.^^ ,,.—,^-—^»—^ ..^-.,^. .^ ,.—,...-.^^«. .—....—..^. interyene, 't+ien they a!so assaulted her. In para 9, she has adT.itted that Joga y"as not pressnt Qt 'rti<st time- Smt.KQWQSi Kostt (PW~2) c'^d M;ndoyi JogQ (PW~3) h<tvs ^ot ssg^ th& 'ncsd^^t. S?nt^indoyi HidsT'.e (PW~1) wifs of AArtdeivi HQSid'3 is solitc.rv ^vswitnsss <s?i€l cios^ rsloitiys of ths dscscssd. Shs is a-iso lft iured y*'ltn£SS- Sh^ HQS d^Dosed shs hos sssn ths irscid^?it. .^—-—•-^ -.,... .^-r»- T...,-^ , .,„— ^^ Hsr or^sencs nt 8 D-^71. i^ h^r h'ouss is HQturQL Her stotts!!ift%nt fi?td< crtr?'oboM°Qtttcln fy'opn th$ F.X-R. fEx.P/l^ Qp.d n^sdicc'l ^Ad^nc^. 0"lv oti 'ttl€ ^fou^d Tti5t shs is rslGtiye witnsss, h^r* svidence cannot bs disccsrdsd. 11. A witn^ss 1$ I'lor^Qllv to b^ co^sicisred 'nd®Dsnd^ntuni^ss hs or shft SDriiftQ3 fro?" sourc^s whlch Qrs likslv to bg tcintsd cyid thnt usu^llv Yr\€?3r'.s ur'lsss the witnsss h<ss ccuss. such QS e'nsnit^ cxco.inst ths iccussd, '9'o wish to i?T15iiGfits hi?n ^QlsiElv. Closs ^sl^ition woyld bs ths li'xst to scrs®'"ths rsfs! cuJDrit o^id falselv imoiiccxte cn innsoce^t D^rso^ . Whiie d^^I'na with the suestion of reHablHty of rgilat^'s; witn'ess the Apex Coupt in the "tsttsr <?f C,t11|^l« ^»N*<4 -*,+|i>!-»we- »' T"*-;.** &•*•.•*-!•» ift^ P"»»i'~^S1h^'" )-^i5>l/^ •l4^/i+ f. 'A'i+ylie'<s'*< l*p ^isig^i Q*iu via'iS&iis; ¥. i ai%» ^iu^te t^i F'Uii^UU aiUwt .ii.i.iU Ui^Ai ^ ^iii.t,.»*a^ is no?'?^£xl1v to bs ccllistdsrsd ind€Deriri sit unls5s hfi or* sh% s5r'!HQS frot?1 sources which cre likeiv to b®tctint^d. PQFO. 26 o'f ths SGid ludQ?nenlt rsids GS u?ider'=- 1 AIR 1953 SC 364 •». ;; •^KS^^ ^, ^ .f/ "'ai.e-''.^' flgtai ',ssw "26- .A wtnsss 's "or*n^l!v to b$ conssd^red indeDends^t unless he or she spr'inqs from sources which are likely to be tainted dnd that usuciiy means uniess the witness has cause^ such as eniTiity agslnst the accused; to wish to impiicQte him falsely. Ordincriiy, a close relation wouid be the last to screen the redl cuiprit and falaeiy implicate Qn i?inoc^?it p^rson. Zt is trus, when feelings rup hi§hcsr\d , 1+iere is cersonal cause for enmitv. that there is a i' tendency to drag in an innocent person against whom a "'i+ness has c grudge olong with 1+ie gujlty, but foundction must be laid for such a criticism and the mere fact of re!ct!onsh!p far" from bei"g a foundation is often c sure ouarantse of truth. 1-lowever. we are not att'emDtino any sweeping generaiization. Each case rriust be jua'ged on its own fetcts. OUF^ observQtlons o're onlv ?nrids to co'Tib^t what is so often out forward in cases before us as a generai ruie of prudence. Tner®is no such general rule. Each case must be Hmited +o anct be govemed by its own facts." 12.Tlis Apsx Court in the mctter of ."ishabbat snd Ors.v. State of M.P. , has held that reiationship is not ground to affect credibility of witness, foundat'on has to be !aid if plea of false implicction is raised. Para 7 of the so.id iudcsiT^snt r%£lds<3S under. "7 (AepeSy because the eye-tt'ltnesses are fomily member's •meir evidence cannot per se be discarded. When there is aiiegation of interestedness, tiie same has to be established- M&re staternent that being re'stives of "'+'e deceased thev are iikely to talsely implicate the accused cannot be a ground to discard the eyidence which is othsrwiss coQent cyid credibls. Ws sho!l also deGl with ttie contention reaardjno interestedness of the witnesses for furthering the prosecution version. Relations'hip is not a factor' to cffsct cr^dibi'it^ of " witness. Tt is iTsore often than not that a relation would not concsal actuci cuipr'it and wake aitegations agoinst <a\ innocent person- Foundation has to be iajd if olea of false imotication is made. ~ In such cases, the court has to adopt a corefu! appr'oach and analyze eyidence to find out whsther it is coaent and credible." 13. Smt.A^rtclclyi Hldme 05W-1) is also injurgd w)tne3S ond he'r* pr^ssnce; csHnot • b& doubted- H^r> stfltt®r?t<£^tinsp'res cohfidence ^nd trustworttiy. Ths '2009 AIRSCW 1486 %. 1B ""--.s^ deceased was s'eeping i" his house, at th.at time the appel'ants went t" the house of the deceased with knife a".d burning piece of wood and after some ciiscussion they assQuSted hir" bv burniyiQ stece of wood and knsf®Qrld other two accused have facilitateci for coTinfiissior1 of ttie cr!rn% Qnd cnus'n3 injury whlch show their grQVs wta"t!on of c-ousing death- ? ^ 14. .Aftsr sQDrec'QtiHQ itis eyidsnc® exyGilrtb!e or> recor'd. lBGr'it$d Sscoid AdditioiQl Ssssions JuctQs hrt3 co^y'cted c^id s^nte"c^d ths o.!30^1!ojits for —yp—--— • -~ the offence punishabie under Section 302/34 of the India" Penal Code. Convictio" &, sentence imposed upon the appel!ants u"der Sectio" 302/34 of the India" Pe"a! Code is based on retiable and clinch'ng evidence wd the same is sustainable under the !aw. 15-0^ close scrutinv of ths evidence ctyoi!lQbl€E on ?*€cord, we do not fincl cny substsince 'n the cppeal. The appeal is liable to be disn'issed fnd is esccordingiy disrn'ssed- Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge R.L. Jhanwar Judge