^ No. ^^2- CFOOO^%;"W , ^ ^ i^li?.,? . APPEAL PRISON6R & T w«w ^-/^ Name ^^^'^t'_^T> r^ Father's Name s'-fV%rr n o. Age -^2.. csRS- Scatenced to -^r^wf ResidentXw- ^t-TT-»•^r^^^.r'^^^-T^-g, _on ^ . (2- • 96 Under Secfion •3^2- <3q^ c^. 0^, by_1?%T4? •^^•a'^?-5r <.^~{2{?^^r ^^^-^-^- It is explained to the prisoner that if he states or wishes to be represented by a legal practitioner the Appellate Court will not proceed with the base for seven days ynless the legal practitioner appears If the legal practitioner does not appear within seven days he may be beard at all if lcgal practitiouer the court may proceed at onee with the case and will notbe obljgedto give a bearing to any legal practitionerwho should appean Date of appliaation for copy of Judgement :- No - 2. Date of which copy received :- ^.)2-'<ji£ 3. Date onwhich appeal sent :- ?-^ ( 2'' qf & 4. Whether the prisoner wished to be represented or not :- No._ -^2^_ Continued in Yes / T^o. .Name ~^T-S^S^'%^T ^^ ^?WT f^i^T_ Jail ^srqc^r" No. ^'/X. ^'rs^&T / Dated ^.t (2-76 Forwarded to the CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ^•afC-c^C'"' iegether with a copy of Judgement or order passed in tfie c^se for favour o| transmission to the proper Applleate Court (. Su perintendentj t'7'Stb-Jail -^ Datc of receipt in C. J. M. Office. Date of receipt of record to accompany. Memo of Appeal of the Appellate Court. No.J^t^^_ dated_^_llin_ Forwarded tot1ie_3B"^~Si /<^-c^.^^(T7rx^v/!?^^P^7?T -t/^TO^y\; @. R. MAGISTRATE -.•;-^,"'^ ft&t^ Qt receipt in Ajpplieate Court_^ ^ XI-HC-78 W^T^Tf^TT^ cTSn'3TT^T$b^|ch k. (S> 3^r "^ww^, w^\w\<o, fsidi'y^< ^I^MI sh^lch '' -^* ^r.t.f.t2.9'J p^ ^O^ 3TT^?T^f^K (l{c(I^c<^ST) ^RTTatK^fNw^T APPELLANTS RESPONDENT 1. Sodi Ga Age. - 2 2. Kurami Age-5i Both res Bctslar) 3. Maclkan Age - 3: Gadiras, State o: Gadiras ilga, S/o Itidma Muriya years. ' peva, S/o Joga Muriya years jdents ofPordem Thana, Gadu'as (District [i De\'7a, S/o Bhuna Muriya years, Wo Gufadi, Dokapara, Thana - '(District Bastar) IvI.P. D.B. : 14-3-2007 Hon'ble Mr L,C. Hon'bieMr.Dhire Slm R.K. Jam, Advocate fo|i Sim Ashish Shukla, Go\t. ^ Ai'guments heard. Oraljudgment dictated on Per L.C.Bhadoo, J. Crimmal Appeal No-1279/p Crimmal Api?eal No. 1280/1997 tll Criminal Appeal No. 1281/1997 fi}e disposed of by this conimon ju^gment (tfc Tlie accused/appellants h| legality and coiTectness ofthejud^ment 4th December 1996 passed by ^T. ^l^f^^l^ ^J^I^TI ^"'fe^trf^SK ^3Tf^TT3TT^T Versus Madhya Pradesh, ttoough Police St Distnct Bastar)M.P. hadoo and tion iidraMishra, JJ. the a^ellant. .dvocate for the respondent/State. ais. ORAL JUDGMENT 997 filed by accused/api^ellant Kurami peva, ed by accused/'appeUant Madkami D^. and ?d by accused/appellant Sodi Ganga are as all the tlii'ee ai^eals arise unpugnedjudginent dated 4"11 Dec^mber 1996. bemg of ctut ve p'efeiYed these appe^ls questionm^ the ofconviction and order ofsentence|dated e l' Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdjalpur, P.T.Ol. ? XI-HC-78 3TT^T^Tf^TW cT^T3TT^T9h^ich ® 3ST .^lAildq, yTfl^^lC, fcfdl^y HW^\l »>*1ich H^ 200 t?T45(<h (y^6'^) ^Rn'w^rfNw^T District Bastar, in Sessions Tri< Sessions Judge after holdmg th(] offence under Section 302/34 oft| to undergo impi'isonment for life. Case of the prosecution, Kolii'ami Nanda gave mei'g mtiiT^ 16.6.1995 at about 6.30 a.m. to tlt he along with mother ancl father v| about 11.30 p.m. Sodi Ganga, K^ Sodi Ganga shot an airow with a thereafter, they ran away. He aio\ were running away and withm injuries sustamed by him. Recej registei'ed the F.LFl. (Ex.P/1) for| lefi for the scene of occuiTence ^i prq^ared the inquest ^fEx.P/5. postmortem examination to Prim< Dr. Aldiileshwar Uraon (PW-^ postmoi'tem report (Ex.P/11) m result of shock, haemoiThage and| !iature. \\rliii€ m police custopy (Ex.P/7), pursuant to that a bow| an'ow was taken mto possession witii blood was seized undei' ExJ4 sheet was filed in the Court ofJud cotniYiitted the case to the Sel Additional Sessions Juclge, Jagclait cbi^f^i41vi ^i^<"iT^te1^t<Ri^i< ^3T(^T3TT^T No. 325/95 whereby the leamed Additional accuseclappellants guilty for coniiTussionof e EPC, sentenced each ofthe accuseA^pdlants [\ brief, is that Kohi'ami Hunga (PW-1), son of |ation (Ex.P/2) m the Police Station Gadu'as on |e effect that yesterday niglit afler takmg dinner 7ere sleepmg in the couilyard oftheii' hquse. At irami Deva, Madkami Deva came together and |)ow, which hit on the stomach of his father and ^ig with his mother ideiitiiied those pei'sons who |5 to 10 mmutes his father succumbecl to the (ving this repoil S.H.O. Police Station Gadii'as the ofidice undei' Section 302/34 of the I.P.C., nd aftei' giving notice (Ex.P/3) to the Panchas, 1 Body of deceased Kurami Nanda was sent for iry Health Center, Gadii'as undci' Ex.P/6 where [) conducted postmorlcm and prq>ared the |vhich he opmed that cause of death was as a cardiac failure and the death was homicida! m y, accused Sodi Ganga gave meiTiorandum vv7as taken into possession under Ex.P/8. Aii lunder Ex.P/10. A vest of the deceased stained /9. After completion ofthe iiivestigation charge iicial Magistrate Fii\st Class, Sul^na who m tuiii tsions Judge, Jagdalpur frorn wliere Aeamed bur received the case on transfer for trial.l P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3TI^T^Tf^Tt^ cT2TT3TT^T9h^lch 3^cT •^|^ld<LI, ^Tfl^^l?, f^Krll^y *41*1^11 ^RIcb ^T 200 311^14^<h (l?^3^£r) ^RTTW^N^n^T Prosecution in order to esj cbNld^ri iTm^t'^te^^R^ ^)3^^TCT^T jtablish thc charge agamst the accused persons exammed five witnesses. Statemtjnts ofthe accused persons vvere record^d under Section 313 ofthe Cr.P.C. m w| against mem in the prosecution ^ have beeii falsely miplicated m th^ Leamed Additional Sessiot) panies convicted and sentenced m<| We have heard leamed coul liicli they denied the circumstances aripearmg Ividence and stated that thcy are imiodent and cnme. s Judge after hearmg counsel for the respective accused as aforementioned. zsel for the parties. Mr. R.K. Jain, leamed coi^nsel for the accusecVappellants argued this case the prosecution has pro| Hunga, son of tiie deceased and| showing them eyewitnesses but fi\ tiine ofcommission ofthe crune, t] hearing the cries of deceased N] accused persons committmg the cri On the othci' hancl, Mr. As^ State supported the mipugtied judgi^ient duced two witnesses namely PW-1 K|Liiii'ami PW-2 Kutoami Pise, wife of the de om theu' evideiice it is establisiied tha1 that m eased, at the 'iey wei'c sleepmg and they wokc up orijy after anda, therefoi'e, they had not witnessed the IYIC m question. [lish Shukia leamed counsel api^earing for the ofthe trial Coun. In order to app'eciate the a] accusecVappellaiit we have pemse^ rgzmient advanced by leamed counsel for the tlie evidence of PW-1 Kulu'aiTii Hunga and PW-2 Kutoaini Pise as these are U\s only mo witnesses on whose evidence the convicrion ofthe accused persons h^s been based. It is admitted fact tliat the 11.30 p.m. PW-1 Kutoami Hunga ^iTcnce was coiTuiiitted in the niglit at about sor^of^hc deceased/has stat^ th^t h^ was Xl-HC-78 3^r ^ww^, t$Tfl^<i<o, fs«ni^^< ^1«4011 Sh*1ich ^ 200 3TT^T^T^i<=h cfSTT3TT^T^^j|cb 311^1 M^ch ('i?*^^) ^cn'w^fNw^T sleepmg at other place,, where< Kulirami Deva, Mudkami Deva ai had quaiTeled with his father in| arrow. In paragi'aph 4 ofhis aiTow was shot at his father he wa| that he has not seen tlic accus^ accused Ganga shot an aiTow. stated that there was a dispute bs agiiculmral field. Accused beUveen his fathei' and accused incident. He has fiirther stated shot, they were sieeping and on h<: is also con'ect to say that after ih[ from belimd while tliey were mj; deceased, has stated that an'ow \^ stomach ofhor husband. m the c|i seen the accused shooting aiTow) from a distance of about 300 coimnission of the crime her N slecping on the gi'ound. Tiierefore, from the deceased Kulu'ami Nanda was sle^ sleepmg on the gi'ound, his son j| room and they woke up only afte^ beitig shot by accused persons v^ stated the incident occun'ed at tl^ behind when they vvere mnnmg| ^i^fd^t-f ^i^<nT^'teT:^i'<Ri«i< ^3Tf^T3TT^?T (s his father was sleeping at another place. [id Ganga came to his house m the niglii|t, as they |the evenmg and they shot his fatliei^ with an cro^-examination this witness has stated that when i^ sleepmg m another room. It is incoiTect to say |d shooting aiTow. He htmself admittted that h paragi'aph 5 of his cross-exainmatio^ he has (tween accused Ganga and his father t^egardmg Ma4kami Deva is of village Gumadi, th^ jGanga took place a week before th^ tltat it is coiTect to say Uiat when the aiy [armg the screanis ofhis father they wo} aiTow was shot they saw the accusecl] [ming away. PW-2 Kulii'ami Pise, wrif<, 3S shot by accused SodiGanga which li]it on tlie Iross-examination she has stated Uiat sh^ |but she saw the accused persons frori p. while they were mnning. At the isband was sleepiiig on the cot and has not behmd Itime of |she was evidhice of dbove two witnesses it is c| ;pmg on a cot, liis wife PW-2 Kulu'ami >W-1 Kulu'ami Hunga was sleeping in hearing the cries raised by deceased 1S ith aiTow. Tliese witnesses have cate! mid nigj.it, they saw the accused pcrsc away and PW-2 has stated that she P.TJO. quaiTel datc of :ow was ce up. it pei'sons & of the ear that pise was another fanda on sorically ins trom saw the XI-HC-78 3TT^?T^)T^ich cT^T3TT^5h^l<=h '-X j^ <g) 3'^T ^ll^Krl^, ^Tfi<-14|(o, fc<cr11<1^< HW^t[ Sh^lich ^ 200 311^1 ^aih (I?^3^^) ^cTTW^f^TW^T accused persons from a distar therefore, it was difficult for the^ too from beliind wlien they wer^ witnessed the accused persons c^ recovered at the instance of accil perced m the stomach of the| evidcnce also to comiect the acd the accused/'ai^eilants can not t| of above nvo witnesses. Thei) sustamed. Iii the result, Crunmal ^ Kurami Deva, Crimiiiial App^ Madkami Dcva and Crinimal ^ Sodi Ganga, succeed, the same| upon the accused/appeUants ar^ under Section 302/34 ofthe IP(] detention smoe 19.6.1995, tliej requu'ed in an>7 other case. Sd7- L.C, Bhadoo Judge ^i^foi41vi ^HdT ^ te^ <^i<-<ii< ^)^rf^T3TT^T ice of 300 fi. when thcy were mmimg away, ri to identitv7 the accused persons m the niglit, that ronnmg away and these persons, m fact! )mmittmg the crime in question. (Jiily have not bow was ised Sodi Ganga and m fact^ the arrow ^~as found deceased, therefore, tliere is no circumstantial used persons with the crime m question, as such e hcld guilty only on the basis ofvveak evidence efore, the judgment of the trial Coun cannot be Ippeal No. 1279/1997 filed by accuseclfappeliant al No. 1280/1997 filed by accused/appeilant ppeal No. 1281/1997 filed by accusecUappellant are allowed. Conviction and sentence unposed set aside and they are acquitted of the charge :. The accused persons are said to have beeti in 'efore, they be set at libeitv7 foilhwith, if not Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.