Xl—HC-78 @ W” Ma; .agy.Q. ‘ am anéiam merm‘olafaw) mmm ma I£I l Drl: ‘ 1 HON'BLE MR. LC. BHADG HON‘BLE MR. DILIP R. DE 1 22—6—2005 i‘o'r' The appellant g Mr. RK. Jain, counse! ‘ u ‘ respondent Oral. & , Learned counsei for second bail applica’rion, Thar disposed of. We have heard fhis a; The accused/appeHam ””374 (2) of we cam. being offence under Section 302 imprisonmenf for life and . mammwrm O AND ESHMUKH; JJ. M.§Cri. lP.No.1584/2 304. The appellani‘ submi‘rfed fhai‘ This is The efore ’rhe appeal may be heard finally and peal for final disposal. ' has preferred This appeal under Sec‘l'ion aggrieved by ‘l'he judgmen‘l‘ of convic‘l’ion and sen'rence da’red 21“ CcTober; 1999, passed in Sessions Trial No.159/99, whereby ‘l’he 'Z'ld Addi‘l’ional Sessicns Judge, Jagdalpur, offer holding ’rhe accused/appellan‘r guih‘y for fhe commission of of fhe I.P.C. seni‘enced him 1'0 undergo pay a fine of Rs.500/—, in defaul‘l of paymenT of fine To furTher undergo imprisonmen‘r for one year; Mr. Sachin Si-ngh Rajpui‘,‘ Panel Lawyer for The Sfafe/ n L Xi—HC-ZZ n 3am, Wu, WW F7” Brief facts of the grosecuTion case are That in’The nigh? of 26- g’ 1-ig99 a? about 1 mm. a1' 1‘31e resid‘ence c1: Chaiki (PW-4) in Viiiage: i Numnpar‘ Murdepam, deceased Poyami Sannu sbpped Quas§- Koso in' § conmc'rion wifh 111a paymen hpf money. 0n 26-4-1999 Poyami Snrmu 1 weni' ‘i'o Viiingz: Nufnnpar and affer markei‘ing, he s‘myed a‘i’ The ’ ‘re‘sidegce cf Chaiki and cca+€ed Beko Dooiu m‘facked fhe deceased in fha nigh? wifh an axe an a coun'r of oid enmi‘ky and commh'fad‘ i'iqe ; mufde’r of Poyami 5annu. R or? of ‘rhe same was Edged on 27-14999 I a? Police 5?a1:ion: Kodenar ‘8' abou‘r‘1é30 haurs by Madvi Kasa. On ‘ receiving i'his repar‘r; i'he ‘i’m‘ion Hausa Gffker regisfere'd (Srime 'Nc.7f99 for me commissio of offence under $ecTion 392 9f The I.P.C. and Took up *he invesfi afion. During The invesfiga'rona posT-mor‘wm of me body of ?oyomi Sannu‘wus conducted by D i. Lakhun Juri (PW-2) and he nm‘iced one incised sfab wound of fhe s of 3" x 2" x i" cavi‘ry d'eep var-mail}! on The righ‘r side ef Temporai egion of 1'he skuH. The ofher‘ injury was cenfusion swelling of size " x 2" on The righf side of cheek. The dbdor opined thaf uii the i juries were anfi-morfem in nature and in his opinion cause of The d 'rh was comma due To head injury, ihe ‘ u ) \ _ yew, i m mm fam'a‘sm § mmm ‘ ”2J— VWW§1§§IW agwm A ‘¥A mac-22 § % o § The lnvesfigm‘ing Officer afier giving ne'rice To Punchus ‘ 3 prepared The Panchanuma (iEx.P#5) of fhe dead body and recorded i sm‘mmen‘rs of wimesses, priepared sh‘e map (EXP-9) of thé place of ! ‘ occurrence. The I‘O. Took‘in‘ro possession the blood smined soil a5 wail as The plain soii from 1"?‘2 piaoe of occurrence under EXP-1Q and § l ‘fne grip of weapon of offer-ca, axe, was Token. 5n1'o possession under 7*- ExP-15, a? fhe ins’mnce of fiae accused on 'rhe basis of The mémorondum' EXP-14 gWen by ‘i’he accused. CIoThes of fhe deceased were Token it'd-o possession fhrough Ex.P-16. Affer compie‘rion of ir vesfiga‘fion, charge sheaf was fiied in fine Court of Addii‘ional Chief: Judicioi Magisfmte, Jogdaipur, who commi‘Hed fiwe case f0 fhe Cour? of Sessions Judge, Jagdoiyur, from where, fhe learned 2’“ Additional Sessions Judge, received fhe case on 'l‘mnsfer. The learned Addi‘l‘ional Sessions Judge offer hearing counsel for fhe accused and fhe Addi‘l‘ional Public Prosecu'l'or, and perusal of record was of fire opinion 'fhaT prime facie, charge under Secfion 302 of fhe I.P.C. was mode ouf againsf line accused/appellant T'nerefore,.he framed 'H'ae charge, however ‘l’he accused denied i'he charge and claimed To be fried.‘ in order To prove 'i'he charge againsf ‘l'i'ie accused/appellant ‘l'he prosecufion examined as mcny as eigh‘i ,wifnesses. Ti'iereaffer, fhe , K7 XI~HC-22 leafned Addi'rionai Sessions Judge,’ retarded fhe sfnfemenf of accused undér Seaion 313 3f The Cr.P.C. in which The accusgd denied 'l'he evidence af fine proseau'rion and aiso denied his involvemenf in commi‘Hing fhe murder o'f Poyami Sannu, and S‘ra‘ted 111a? he is Jhnocen‘f and ha has bean fgiseiy impiicafed in fhe crime. ‘ hearin§ fhe argumen‘i's of fhe A&di+iomi Pubiic Prosecufor and caunsel 1 for me accgsed, iearned Additionai Sessiéns Judge ccnvic'red the accused/appeuan'r under Serfion 302 of fhe I.P.C. and sen‘fenced him ‘ accordingiy. A? The ouTseT, leamed counse! for the accused/appenun‘t argued Tha‘r 1he accuseé ha‘ been convicfed' wifhou‘r any iegai evidence avmla is an lecerd On the ether hand, \eqmed Pme\ Lawyer argued 'i'hqf fhe weapon of offence, axe, wn i recovered a+ fhe msfnnce . 9f +he accused fherefore' The accused has beenconvicfed rightly on fha‘r basis and en ’rhe basis of evidence of W-1 Madvi Kosa. Havmg heard learned counsei .or i‘ne par‘hes we have perused fhe Iudgmeni' and record of +he Mai Cour“? The prosecui'ion has +rled i'o prove fine or‘rence a9 s1- Theiaccused/appelionf based on The Kosa 8: PW—3 Gangrumm. Affer t exfm judiciai confession lade by rhe accused before PW-1 Madvi owever, The perusai of evidence of fhese /,, XI-HC-22 Two wime$ses shcws tha‘r both fhesz wi‘rnesszs have Turned hostHe. PW-i has sfa‘l'ed +hg* on en quiry from 1'he accused before the Panchas he expiained Tha’r he had nnT murdered Poyami Sannu. Howéver, affer declaring These witnessea os‘rila on cross-cxnminafion by fhe Public Prosecu‘mr‘ ?W 1 has sfa‘i’ d fna‘r fhe repor'r Ex P-l was given by him “oniy. ‘ BUT, ,n the c"ossf-excmmaflon he has he? supparfed The prosecu‘hon case and smd a‘r he d¢es no? know how Poyam: 5mm died :3nd haalso éoes no? know anyfhing abou'r The deafh of ?oyami Smnu. Poyuhh Sunnu's bod was lying in fronf of fha house 9f Chalki. PW—i has fur‘i’her sfm‘ed m" he. does n9? know how he had wrif‘ten in The report Ex.P‘1 fhaT' h w Poyami Sannu died, and he had not disciosed +0 fhe Poiice 1h 1' how Poyami Sannu died. He furfher sfa‘red fha'r if is correct 1'0 say Tho? boob (the occusedlappelinn?) had no+ .ppegred Before ‘rhe anchaynf and +he repor+ was lodged oniy ar'fer The PanchayoT deeded To iodge The reporT Sumar Is The ewdence of PW- . ‘TheTrefore, These Two wiTnesses have noT supported The prosecuTion close Perusoi of The evideince of ?W-6 (Poyami‘Sonnu) shows ThoT wiTness €haiki informed him abouT The deoTh of Poyomi Sonnu, Tho? The uccuud‘ has commiTTed The murder of deceased Poyomi $unnu wTTh Tongio. Similar is The. evidence of PW-T (Oyomi Mohangu) who , I L XIwHC—ZZ, EW,WW mm? (mgrwgik? 39 warm 20° m V ‘ ¢ \ \ \ V V WE“ Wqw§wmk WWW WWW 4V mr$rnam § has smfed That Cha!ki informed Thém that Dooia commih‘ed The ‘ . murder of Poyami 5mm (deceased), whereas Chaim himédf hos fumed hosfile and he has; neT suppor‘rgd the pmsecufion case. Therefore fhem Is no ewdel'vcé reaar'ding exfra judiciai confession or ; ¥ eyewrmess ‘ . ewdence m order fa canned fhe accused WM! fhe murder :of Payami Sannu. ‘ ‘ / New commg 1'0 The qu shon of recwer-y of axe a? 1‘he Instance of The accused Wifhouf gom mm merits of recsvery o. axe ‘rher‘e is no reporf of Serologis‘l: on eord whmh shows 'rhnf human biood of +312 blood group of The de used was found on The one In The absence 0‘ such reyc-‘T roco ery c axe coma? be connecfed wl+h The ms‘i‘once of foe accused ts o oommoo axe whim is ovoilabie easiiy m the vdhge side There is murder of Poyami 5annu be Tee ‘Hqe axe which was recovered a? fhe accused wrl'h 1-he murder of{oymm Sonnu Resulfomiy, fhere is no n ofher ewdense, whmh connects fhe mm of iego‘ evideoce on recu A murder of ?oyami 5annu. x d which connee‘rs fre accwed wr‘i‘ The ‘ ‘ We fad 1‘0 understand hot how such o semor Judlcmi Gfflcer Hos corvrfed The accused w: cu? any lega' ewdence on reoord He has simply convw'fed the occu d on surmses and conJecmres Thss ,k/L g3 In E 1 1 l ii 1 ‘ 1 € shows "Hm? This Judicial 0fif§cer lacks ‘rhe basic kmwledge of km to bé applied in fine marker of a {:riminai friai. , \ ‘ 1 j % In fhe resuh, The appew succeeds and, fhe same is ai!cwad;_ The § { Q ‘I mimvic‘l-ion and sen+ence awcwdegi 1'6 fhe accused/appeHam' are 5e1- agide and he is acquifi'ed a1: fhe charge under Sec‘fien 302 bf The ILPTC‘. fer fhe commission of murder of Poyomi Sannu. The accused be ! i se1' a? liberty f‘or'rhwi'l'h, if no‘r required in any oiher- case. ‘15 view of fhis order, M.(Cri.)P.No.1584/EQO4 sTands disposed 9‘5 Pariies are en‘ii‘i'ied for cer'iified copy of this order J L.c.BHADoo Sdl. , i ”4" - i i Sdl- 1 Dilip Raosaheb Deshmulfh Judge {i Judge Soma ‘1 (@éw)