H I I lHHlHlllltHHII ~' “ “sh-arm x ;: :9 3 Rwgy: High m APPEL F PRISONE Rankmgfgw‘ ‘ No... Name M" La r3 \ ‘ Fathersname 31% OA\QA "‘\{\¢’éarj jgx’ai‘vK WV~ ‘\ $‘DVK5\ L ‘ Res1dence ”y‘mV“ a)“ qkk§j Age 1% qg - . Sentenced to '?n\J\§¢\w‘ %‘\l\0\5 <¥ \xx §X Under sectlon g0 5:..5...l?.r.tn'... bYaa “mm E'Q a 32m “33mm ‘ It 1s explamed to the prisoner that 1f he states or w1shes to be represented by legal practltloner the Appellate Court w11l not proceed w1th the base for seven aays unless al practitioner appears If the legal pract1t1oner does not appear w1th1n seven ‘ay‘ he may not heard at all . lfthe prisoner states that he does not wish to be repre- . ’sented by legal practitioner the court may proceed at once with the case and will not be obliged to give a hearing to any legal practitioner who should appear . t I Date of Application for copy of Judgement rmr¢t§§ .. Date on which copy receiVed 2:1? 2 3 Date on which Appeal sent .. V 4 Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented ornot — Yes / No N0..~.. 1:3,%) fLT7 ...... .. Name ‘9\1L¢H)'%’\‘ inc§\(v‘ t Confinedin .J .v$\ s1 Jail §$) { Dated 9s" gawk! 9.3” l orwarded to the (9W Z’ntLC-mae “pg Hag Kin—i. ’Wl Vt OW L togather which a copy of Judgement or order passed 1n the case for Jame favour w l’etran a 39 t} nirssion to the prgper Appellate‘Court. ‘ - ...a;a‘tg.&gm§gm..(m¥,)....-. (’K’” Q‘r ’ Pm u‘t “(Mm wwwrwl 'A eat/L; i 1th 65‘ Hawk; Date of receipt in... office... _ Date of receipt record to accompany the A ’Memo ofAppeal to the Appellate court No ‘ c’ .3. ...‘~-.., n-v-uu..t ”Dated-w.............r..... 199... Forwarded to the Date of receipt in Appellate Court ...... _ 1 w ; A O ? ‘é g ' H ' F XI—HC-22 XI-HC-22 mam W ' carrying swordsfiék (Gup‘ri) in his wand. Deceased Chho‘ru @ Tun‘run @ 1 Rajesh was saying 'H'Iaf accused Makhan has‘burs'r $5 kef'l'iedrum (NagadaL i Therefore he has 1'0 pay ‘l'he money on which accused/appeHan‘l' chased fhe deceased and a‘H'acked him wrrh fhe swordsfick (Gup‘h) on his neck as a iresuif of whlch Chhoi'u @ Tun n @ RaJesh fell down and died ‘spbn'raneously Accused/appellan‘l' so rushed Towards him On receivmg This repor'l’ 51‘a'hon House Officer Police Smhon Dongergarh regisfered Indian Penal Code and 'l‘ook up 'i'he invesfiga‘hon He Took info possessi n ‘ihe burst kef‘rledrum (Nagada) under Ex P 2 and aiso recovered The swor sfick (Gup‘h), weapon of offence under EXP—3 from fhe house of ac sed/appeHan‘r in pursuance; of fhe memorandum (EX.P~13) given by 'rh accused/appeHan'r. He also prepared The Panchnama (Ex P-7)’ of fhe b dy’of deceased Chhofu:@ Tunfun @ RaJesh and sen‘r fhe body for p sfmorfem examinafion To CommuniTy HeaITh CenTre Dongergarh under E P 10 where Dr A K Tamrakar (PW-8) conducTed posTmorTem on The y of deceased and prepared The posTmorTem reporT Ex P—10A in w ich he opined ThaT There was a sTob inJury perforaTing Trachea leading o respira‘l'ory disTress deaTh inJury is caused by hard 6: sharp edged weap n and The deaTh is homICidal m naTure SiTe pian (EXP-12) of place of oc urrence was prepared by The PaTwari. Recovered arTicles were senT for c emical examinaTion To Forensic 5cience ' LaboraTory, Raipur, from where rep rT Ex.P-1y6 was received. [Thaw .. 3, _ k w 'rhe case under SecTion 302 of W e d . .............................. .......W 200 mmwm . .. g, iCourf of learned Judicial Magisfr'o \ . 1 commi‘H‘ed the case ‘ro ieamed 52s: The prosecwrion in order- hccused/appelbnf examined hqcused/appellanf was recorded by 313 of 1‘he Cr.P.C. in whith he deni Thai; he is innocent he has bee falsely implicated in The crime and lwimesses have deposed againsf him' on accoun'r of animosi'ry. afTer hearing iffhe Addi‘rional Public Learned Sessions Judge :Prosecu‘ror 6i counsel for fhe accused convic‘l’ed and sen‘l'enced The accused in 1'he manner as men‘lioned in Para- Homicidal deafh of decease d Chhoi'u @ Tunfun @ Rajesh is no‘l‘ in dispufe. rhe accused/appellant in fhe crime in As far as involvemenf of i‘ques‘i'ion is concerned, PW-i Nemic hand, who lodged 1he repor'i (EXP-1) in ifhe Police S'l’a‘iion, Dongergarh, has sfafed in his evidence fha‘r on fhe ‘fafeful day a'r abou'l' 4.00 p.m. in fhe evening he saw fha'l' deceased Chho‘l’u and accused Agakhan- was chasing him. Affer‘ completion of inves'l’igafion, charge shee'l' was filed in 1'he 1’e Firs'r Class, Dongergarh who in 'rur'n :ions Judge, Rajnandgaon for 'rr'ial. +0 prove fhe charge againsf 1'he of iearned Sessions JL‘xdge under Section d fhe prosecufion evidence and sin'i'ed nine Witnesses. ‘S'rafemem @ Tun'lun @ Rajesh was running Deceased was saying fhaf accuse fherefore, he has ‘lo pa‘y The mone l'fhe deceased wi‘rh‘ knife. Accused 1 of This judgment d had burs? &’ ke'Hledrum (Nagada), y and on This accused Makhan a'Hacked lappellanf also rushed ‘l'owards him. He [113%W 't I—H» XI—HC-22 ‘f / ’/ L lodged The report Burs? ke‘r‘HedrLIm (Nagada) was faken in'l'o pdssession under EXP-2 and weapun of offe was faker! in‘ro possession under EXP- 3 from fhe residence or accused Makhan. PW—4 Ayodhya, who had also Wii‘messed Thevcrime ‘in question, corrobora‘red The above evidence. In fh‘e cro‘ss-examinarion of These eyewimesses, +he defence has no? . \ been .able To eliciT any circumsTan e, which makes The evidence of These TWO eyewiTnesses unreliable or unT usTworThy. PW-1 Nemichand, in Para-4 of his gross-exan‘IinaTion has sTaTed ThaT even prior To ThaT, on The occasion of Diwali accused enTered his hou e carrying axe wiTh him and he lodged The reporT in The police sTaTion f ThaT incidence also. Moreover, The Weapon of offence was recovered aT The insTonce of accused/appellant from his residence, The some was T f‘or chemical examinoTion and as per FSL reporT The weapon of offence .e. swordsTick (gupTi) was found sTained - wi'rh blood; > Therefore, in view of ‘l'he above, The involvemenT of accused/appellanT in/commiTTing Th crime in quesTion is established. Learned counsel for Te accused/appellonT argued ThaT accused/appellant assaulTed The de eased on a spur of momenT, in'a sudden quarrel, Therefore, offence does n ‘r Travel beyond .§ecTion 304 ParT-II of The Indian Penal Code. [dew n h o n XI-HC— 22 WW ,9 r m In order *0 ap§recia+e fhe u en? advanced by learned counsel far fhe accused/appellan'r we have per-u d fhe ewdence of PW-1 Nermchand & PW-4 Ayodhya ichand & PW-4 Aypdhya, if is clear- 'l'haf accused/appellant bur-sf The k edrum (Nagada) for which deceaéed asked fhe necused 1‘0 pay :rhe money Therefore, accused/appeHanf brough‘r swords‘Hck (Gupfi) and ran offer de eased Chho'ru @ Tunmn @ Rajesh and ’a'h‘acked hlrn on his neck 'rhe vrl’ l par‘t of organ and as per medical ewdence of Dr A K Tamrakar (PW There was a s‘fab wound on fhe neck, injury was on The irachea and cause f deaTh was stab injury and same was > homicidal In naiure Therefore lookmg +0 The na re of weapon of offence place where The accused/appellanT assaulTed de eased and The manner In which The accused/appellanT commITTed crime In quesTIon we are of The considered opinion ThaT The accused/appellan assaulTed The deceased WiTh The InTenTIon To cause his deaTh. As su h, we donoT find any subsTance m The ' argumenT advanced by learned couns l for The accused/appellant In The resulT we do noT fnd any IllegahTy or tnflrmITy m The JudgmenT of Trial courT which reqUi es no inTerfergnce by This CourT The appeal being dev0id of meriT liable T be dismissed and same is dismissed. L.C. Bhadoo Sdl- Dhlren dra Mishra vFr'om ‘rhe evidence of PW—1 Sdl- Judge i I ‘ Judges.“ we Tied” m e l - )