|H‘i||||||I||||||l"WINN CF000005881 ' m H HIGH couaT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR ' ’ TE CRMMAL APPEAL No; OF 1993 IIN /' E; 7 it? APP£ANT: ‘ ‘ Thunnu réam son of Sukru Konra, 'ageél 3b years’; residenii of Kulé'é Lodam{ P . 8 a Jaéhpurnagar /District Raigérh. vs° RESDNT: x State of Madhya Prade$é through P.$. _Ja)shpurnagar E mqDER‘ SECTmN 374(2) Cg.P.c.' APPAL ‘ ‘ l PONE Xl-HC-78 mWW ...zgx;z&.4%.‘..&§.c.>/;i§...-... H1200 §) @ was:m (ma) mmmma . mm#f§érmw twm {)EVI5ION gENCH: HON‘BLE #KR. LC. 5HADOC} £z HGNWE :%‘.R.DHIRENDRA MIfyHRA, 33 i8.§i.2§66 ShriAbhay Tiwuri, Advo Lre far ‘5"he appeifunt Shr‘i U.N.3. DemAddiTia ai Public Prwacuwr wh‘h Shri Aiok Bakshi, 6ovgmmen'? Advocafe. fa 'H’re $mfe. Om! judgmam' dicTafed en Day's; PE§ LC. $HA§OQ J. Secfian 3:74 (2) uf We CraPJC. accused/appaHam Thunnumm ques?§0ned fha iegalify of judgmenf ofrconvic‘?ian cmd order of 52mg ca damd 1011993 passaa‘ by leamgd Addii‘ébnal Sessians’Judge, Jas urmggr in fiessions Trial No.133/92 whereby kamed Addih'onaf ss§ons Judge affer hciding '§'bg accusad/appetlanf~guiHy fgr- co mission 9f murder of Rainu Sifigh com/icmd him under Secfiofi By ‘r‘his appecd under h 02 Gf The Indian Pam! Code mid senfenceci him i0 underga impris men? far ii'fe. The prosecu‘iion case, iri br‘af, is Thai 0n §.§.’1992 when deceased Qainu Singh wag cui’riva‘rii’ig his ijne‘accused/appeilam harem cams: wifh an axe'cmd smried affackin Rainu Singh, ’ne assaui'reci Rainu Sirigi'i repeafediy, as a resuif of which a neck eff Rainu Sirigh was cuT and he ital! down on ihe ground am? ed s‘poniariaouslyi The incida‘n’r was i i i i i i i snésiamm ammésim . c e i d c i XI-HC-78 iw m§#i$ $1200 ' :méumRHiaw) wwww ammam y WW wW Emmi-«Mama! rL/ $a§qaué21 wifnessed by Ei‘r‘summ (PWn3}. Theréafj‘er, The accused/appefbnf wen‘f 'm The Viliage KeTwar Qirsai (‘DW—i) and made, éxfmjudicia¥ confession f‘nm’ ‘na has murdared Qainu Esmgh. On hearing This, Birsai (PW-1) *mok #he accusw/appellcnf before fhe Rarichas and in presence of Panchas %ha 'accused/appeilam' again made exfrajudiciq] wnfesgion regarding murder of Qainu $3ngh. Upan which Birsaiied§ed fhe reperi EXP—1 in ‘z‘hg Poiice Srmfien Eashpu ar. Afier rggisieririg ihe case Tim Env'eS’iiga'ring Gfi‘icer iafi ‘F The Ecene of occurrence, prepared The Parichanama (EXP—3) afTer giv ng no‘fice TO fhe Panchas, sen? The bédy for pee-imori‘em examinaii n f0 The 9rimary Heai‘ih Cem‘re, Jashpurnagar where PW—7 Dr. 3K. Shrivasmva canducfed The posfmorfem on ‘rhe hody of ceased Rainu Singh and prepared ihe posimoriem repom‘ Ex.P\-6. A per posimoriem reporf, deceased Raine Singh received seven injuri The Invesiige'iing Officer reek info pcgsessmn 1*he blood swirled sail and phin soéi from ”‘rhe place sf oceurrence under ExPaé. He so fcck im‘o possesSien one axe s‘rained wiTh biood under ExPnE. Affer compiei'ion of inv siiga‘rion, eherge sheei was fiied in *rhe Couri‘ef Eudicioi iv‘iogisfm're Firs? Ciass, Jashpurnagar, who in Turn commi’i’ied ”rhe' case +0 iearn d Sessions Judge, Raipur from where iedrned Addi’rianai Sessions J dgei Jeshpurnager received fhe case on iransfer fer friei. Y I i r g o e e'. l W$qi$ .. . . . . 2,,- . —.. 200 wrmmaiaaz)‘ ‘ , mmmanéaw . , 3 ,,_ a; % m$1 ‘ anéarmiéqim’ ammelm ' ’accused/appeiinm and Shfi 3akshil governmen‘f Advocafe far ”the Smfe/respandam and perused ‘rhe record. The homicidai dea‘fh of aaim Singh is emf in dispm‘e. ‘As far as #ha .iavowemenf 'of accused ‘ppellam in ?he crima in ques'rion is coracemed, PW-E’), airsumm, o is “ma eyewi‘l'hess mfha incidem‘, has smfed in his evidence fhai’ on The faiefui day he saw Thai ‘rhe accused/appeiian’r assauh’ed ainu Sihgh wi‘ih an axe as a reSuH' cf which Ruinu Singh (iied spom‘a eousiy. PW—l Birsai & PW—2, 6anshumm have e'ic’red Thai The accus d/appeiicmi came Toi‘fhem and made eximjudiciai confeesion fhai' ' e has cbmmih‘ed murder of Rainu Singh. The prosecu¥ien in order To prove We chqrge againsf The accused/appalianf axa‘mined‘ seven wimesszs Sm'remenf sf accused/appéllcmf was recordei by learned Addi'ricna! Sessions Judge under Sec‘rion 313 Vof The Cr.F‘.C. in which he denied 'rhe prosacufiosq av§den¢e and $‘ra1'ed. fha’? he is jnnocen-f and has been faisely implicm’ed ie'a fhe crima. Learned midi' Sessions Judge af'fer hearing learned Addifieml Public Pmsagu?or caunse! far The accused canvicw‘ed and sem'anced ‘i’he accused in “the manner as mem‘ioned ‘in Pam—1 of fhés judgmeri‘i'. We hava hedrd Shri hay Tiwari, {earned counsei for fha 0, #ddi. Public Prosacufor wi’rh 5hri / SP/FS/2oos - 20.35 m l & b e w ”-5“ 200 WEqim f. . .. . . :n maavriawiai- aaranéam 1:;ja'wmma mam (Karma?!) I $Wané$t ' I _ Roshan/— As per evidence of fhese Wm accused/appeilanf was, voiumnr Therefore] iri View of Th: To The incidan‘r anti PW-iB’irs aécuse¢7appei¥anf has made e considared opinion *ha‘t Theré a“? "rhe ‘rriai‘coum‘ {ind fine acct. far commis‘sio‘n of murder of R1 In fhe résuhf, fhe appe§% mam"? and some is dismissed. Sd/- ‘ L.C. BHADoo -/ udge ’ J /, ”\i lasse$ exfmjudicia! confeS$ion made by y, Wue anti prompt z evidence of PW—3 Birsumm, a‘yewifnass Ed & PW-E Ganshumm before whom ‘rhe x’rmjudicics! cum‘assion, we are of The is no illegalify or infirmify in fhe f§nc§ing sed/appailam has been righ'l'Ey convicfzd zinLLSingh. is “able ‘3'0 be dismissed being devoid-of Wk 1 Sd/. l DMENDRA WSHRA \ ‘ Judge L r .\ \, - r