iiBgiBJEiailll XI.HC—78 3llt?I ?iT f<;-fl<* 'cTSqr 3?TT^T sti*11ch 3^? •^W[<fl't{, W^\W , ^V^W^ ^WM sfiNlch W^ 200 an^?r''raw (4yit-^ii<ii) 'Rarw ^ifei sii^r ponarain. S/o Bnag'waii Siligh, Age 25 \eai-s, Occupation Labour work, R/o (p-ram. Balinapafhi-a, Kota Kuridili, fhaua Aquni, Tahsil aad District Iphamtari (C. G.) C31 <3t (ip L.C. Bhadoo, J:- Shri Ravindra Agr Shri Ashish Shuli:| Heai'd. This appeal is conviction aiid order of bv the Additional Dhamtaii (C.G.) in S.T Additional Sessious accused/appellaiit guil' Sections 307 & 302 611 ^i'tifff'tit'i *ii*icii ^f^'fe1^ <^i^$i< ^; siRn sii^i tate of Ciihattisgarh, tiii-ough Police tatioa Ariuiii, District Dhamtari ;.G.) SNAL PSOCEBURE ;iRU-.C BHADOO, J, & HON'BLE S}IRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA,_J, 17.10.2007) :ffia''al, Couiisel for tiie appeUajat. [a, Govt. Advocate ibr tlie State. directed against t-he judgiaent of seilteiice dated 08.03.2001 passed •Judge, Dhamtaii, Distiict No.253/2000, whereby tiie leanied Judge 'after holding tlie \y of tiie offeace punishable uilder tlie IPC, seiitenced htm to undergo S^ssioas ^•.".-^^^•^rt-liu^c^tA;S^--^a. l^*fa.i*l^i^^^^A:*rt±?tTrhi'aAntf^i»mtESittaG ygq- ^||^|(?iA(, «iTfl<M'IS, Rltfl^y ^WM *MI* ^.:A...^...1Q.]01WI. 200 an^v ^T ft-fi.'h w SIT^T itiiiii an^r irag; (Tpfgpga: •g^nwntei sn^i 2- '*ii)id41-< tinaf^f^S <f»t<^i< '^aiRnan^i yesji-s imprisonment for 7 ye^i-s and life imprisorLment. Botli the sentences were directed |to run concun-entlv. It is aii admitted ifcct fhat accused is soa-m-law of ffae deceased. Case of fhe prose^fcution ia brief is fhat on the dav of the iiicident, tlie accujied/appellaiit went to liis in-laws house smd abused theiu [sayuig tliat tliey ai-e iiot sendiug liis children to his liouse, a^ tliat time; he was catr)'ing kiiife iii Iiis hand. Tbe accused/4ppellaiit attacked Iiis niofher-iti-law - Puiini Bai wifli a kaife |on her back. Seeing tliis, his tafher- iii-law - Joliar Lal @ Vee|r Suigh (since deceased) caiue tliere aiid intervened. The acd Mm, as a resiilt ofwhic]i| liiia wifh the lerufe on Iii Puniii Bai, accused ran !used ia ffae fii-st iiistaace pushed' he feU down. T'he accused attacked s left shoulder. On heai'uig cries of ^iway. Tliere was profuse bleeding ironi tlie iujiuy, as a res^lt ofwhich, Johar Lal @ Veer Suigli died on fhe spot. The ia.ap.er was reported by Ra-m Sunder tn the PoUce Station - Arju^u under Ex.-P/7. Aft.er registeriiig Uie case, fhe liivestigaljiag Officer left for fhe scene of occiirrence. The accusl Siiigli, while ia police cus] pui'suaace of fhat lie goi iiiquest (Ex.-P/ 10) on tlie 'd/appeUaiit - Joliar Lal @ Veer tody gave nieiuoranduia Ex.-P/S, in t recovered fhe kiiit'e - weapoa of offence. Site Plaii (Ex-P/$) was prepai'ed by Haika Patn-ari. After giviilg notices (Ex.-f/9) to tlie Panchas, he pnspared body of fhe deceased- Johar Lal.®; [i»,illl' T.K^'^':T^^^T-n^"^:T'-;-^^'-^^-^T^~'-TF'T^.'^?^^.-T?^^T^I'^;';^^'1^5^^5EE£a!^C^S^ —y.r—cT'Ai •;eC^stKi>i.ii gei^is^i'^cs'at p.t-sri-i -at-.saa&stwi'Aiititf^-i^'f1- r III --r' isli 3BI '!i°"';.fli ^M ,.i^i?l :s:^ XI-HC— 3Ti^r?^t?^m w aii^r *t<i<p <i-OT=i "i<i'Mi(y><<, yiTfl'M're, fs)<yiiy^< _.__^^//». A- ^n/ o? ^PTPIT *NI* •-"-'-••••••--—-;r"--f---.-..^ ^Q^ an^r ^w Cq?f^?tr) TOnw^ifrosn^i -2 1 'if-^r- Veer Sm.gh. Body was s ^)i<t[<n<i1i JW-Rflf ^f^^ Tf^P^TC ^aiRiHsn^r nt for oostoiorteia exaiiiination to uie GoveiTuneut Hospita|l, Dhamtaii iinder Ex.P/11, whei'! Dr. R.H. Mishra (PW-^ opuied tiiat fiie cause of| to tlie cut uijui^' over ftj |) conducted tiie post-morteiii. He Ideafh was haem.orrhage, shock due e sub-claviaii arteiv and the death was hoinicidal. He prepa^ed report (Ex-p/ 17). Piraiii Bai (PW- l') was sent for inedical the same Dr. R.H. Mishrt Doctor iioticed tliat tlier4 Yz" over riglit side of fh4 was caused by hard ajadl i.e. kiiite was sent for t Doctor, after iaspectionl opmed that the injuiy fo| Siugh caii be caused bv t After coiapletion o| filed in Oie Coiu-t of Chiet in tuin coiainitted tiie ^ from. where leamed Ad4 case oa traasfer for niall The prosecution i^ accused; appeUaiit exai4uied 9 witaesses. The statenient of the acciised/appeliailtw[as recorded under Section 313 ofthe Code of Criininal Proced|ure, iii wliich, he deiiied fhe iaateri.al appearitig agaiast him[ in the proseciitiou evideiice aild lexamination, she was examtaed by (i and he gave report (Ex.P/ 18). The was an. abrasiou iil tiie size of 1 x back near right scapiila aiid uijuiy bhuit object. The weapon of offence txamJTiatioii under Ex.-P/13 to tlie of the kniie under Ex.P/13 A, he [.uid on th.e body ofJonar Lal (B^ Veer \he said weapon. flie investigation, charse sheet was fjudicial Magistrate, Dhamtari, who ^a ^^\ ~^ V'\ f^ f^f~^S^^lf^~V t ^ ^i~5~i)r^<' ii^. i.^ LJ.J.I^ i^^ai5±^jjjLO t^; i-^'^. IUF, itional Sessions Judge received fhe a. order to estabUsh chai-ge agamst '^, M 68S ^ig B Xl-HC—78. sn^v ^r l<;-ii?h w sn^v *tii'sb 3^ET "4|<i|lci<i<, QTfly'lfi, (S|<?il'M^< ^Wv{[ *NI<* Ot.,A.z..in..^i an^r tR^ (lyt-jattitt) W, 200 TOITW^lfOT 311^1 4 stated fhat he is innocefat aiid has been falselv miplicated iii tlie criiiie. The leamed Addi tlie counsel for flie sentenced the accused/; We have heard SUii aoueUaat aud Shri Ashi: tlie State. Shri Agrawal has Johar Lal @ Veer Sin.gh. tlie deceased, who wifiit stated fhat on fhe fateful house aiid attacked heil iiitervened, flie accused^ knite, as a result ofwhi Singh sustaiaed the inji: The above ocula inedical of evidence of stated that on 20th May on tiie bodv of Joharla incised wound ia the siz neai" ftie neck, death ws view of fhe above oc estabUshed that fhe de; hoinicidal in uature. lcblilI?I1tH*1 'WRTf '^.'fe^ <f<flt<ci< ^; siRn SIT^I Lp, ional Sessions Judge aft.er heaiing respective pai'ties convicted aad ippeUaut as aforeraentioned. ri Raviadra Agrawal, Counsel for the ih Shiikla, uovei-iiinent Advocate for not disputed the homicidal deatli of Moreover PW-1—Puniii Bai, Vvife of :ssed the incident has categoricaUy day, accused/ appeilaat caine to her aiid when her husbaiid (deceased) [appeUan.t attacked liiin also wifh'tiie ;h, her husband - Johar Lal (3, Veer ^y aad died on fhe spot. evidence is coiToborated by tlie pr. R.H. Mishra (PW-9) , who has POOO, he conducted tlie postmcrteiii i|l @ Veer Singh and fhere was £m of 1" x %" x 3" on the left shoulder hoinicidal iu uature, Tberefore, ia l|-llar aiid luedical evidence, it is El.'th of .Johai' Lal @ Veer Suigh was !ii }~ '"Ijllll^ """•-—••'a«,ye..ai .^M:SE sanu 3d-HC—78 3:5ET ri)|<||<?i<<, ®Tfl<1'IS,FslOKrfy sn^i w K;ii<ti '?[Sff 3TT^T^>*lN» _....&^...^..ij3. 1WTOT (hMicb' €> •V^ 200 an^?T iiaq; (ijqfygti) iufation As far as cora.pli(}: is coiicemed, iii tiiis naxnely Punni Bai (PW| law of tfae accusee that on fhe fateful davl husbaiid was sittm.g u) time, accused/appella^.t hand aad after abiisiiA tlie back. Seehig ttu.s,| accused attacked binil wliich, he sustained th^ !n cross-examiuy not been able to eUcit a] evidence of tliis witaes; con-oborated in niateri^ becaiise, Dr. R.H. IV postmorteiii on the bod Siiigh, has stated th.at shoulder near tlie ned froia that iiijuiy, Joha: Moreover, knife ia quei tlie accused/appellant, ti.ie Doctor and after ex (Ex.-P/lSA). The Doct ou the shoulder of the +i<)i<-i4'< timaf 'ii.felzt <P>I«(K ^afinsn^i }ity of tlie accused m. crime ia question case, tbere is only one eye-witliess 1), who is none else tliaii iiiofher-ia- ^peUaiit. She has categorically stated at about 6 p.iu., she aloiig wifii her tlie coui-n'ard of their bouse, a-t that canie fhere holdiag a knife iii his K her, attacked her Vi-ith the knife oa her husbaad came aiicl niteivened, also w-ith the knite, as a resiilt of iuji.uy aiid clied spontaiieously. of fhis witaess, tiie defen.ee'has i|ay cu'cuiEistaiice, Which discredits Uie The evidence of this witness stsmds f. particulars by tlie inedical evidence, fislii'a (PW-9), who coiiducted the Iv of fhe deceased - Johar Lal (3i Veer there was aii iricised woiuid 011 Uie left and as a result of profuse bleeding I- Lal @ Veer Siagh died on ftie spot. ition was recovered at fhe itistaiice of ]the same was sent for exainination to :^rtiin.ation of tfie kiiife, he gave report. fpr has opined that th.e injury found Ideceased caii be caused by the sanie h- r- •^^M££^f:3f?Ftfsw^*=W^K6^ iriltli.^- :"IE''iE-rT'-~—;-;'.7'S.'I£';::;'!'iFT~':".'.iS^R?^F"" •;1?w^^7i^^-???iEa^^3i^I^--?^S^.S S^t^^giKFsn'3ff^^^E?i?^^f^i^^JT^^^^i^^^-Tj.^'^^^^^^^^ '"i 0^ it; K^K: XI-HC—78 STI^I ?n ft-ii.'h ^^ SFIT^Tsft^w 1 3:5q- ^l^l^q', ®Tflyi<o,R|<rtiyy KIM^I *KI*^..AA.^^.. Wt. 200 an^?r'wre Clpf^3*T) 'B^nwsfro sii^i 6 knife. Therefore, froj] circiiinstaiitial evidencej question is established |) Sllri Ravindra dispute bebveea tfae ia-laws were not sendiil inatter was coBiproiaisej of tlie accused, but theyj house, tlierefore, ou fh|s tlieir house, abused Pu^i: (deceased) aud iii fhat spot, wifhout aiiy int^ cleceased on ttie left knife laiided on fhe su'bl arteiy was cut, fliere if iajuiy, aiid Johar Lal placed reHaace on the matter of State of U.R, Atrawal acdused flie accused does not e IPC. On fhe otiier IIE silpported tlie judgiuent Havuig heard leai' to appreciate the ai'guiu <*i<il<'i41-< iimaf iffyS <l»i«;i< ^; sifim sii^i n fhe above oculai', inedical and coraplicin' of flie accused m. crtme iti sevond reasonable doubt. argued that fhere was soine aad his wife, due to which, his tg the wife wifh Mm. Thereafter, the Q. as.cl the wife was sent to tlie Iioiise were not seading the cbildren to his fatefiil day, fhe accused came to |ini Bai aiid Johar Lal @ Veer Siagh brocess, when Johai' Lal came on fhe tntion, accused once attacked fhe joulder neai- the neck. However, Uie 'l-claviaa arteiy, as a result of which., |i?as profuse bleedtag fi-oiu tlie said g Veer Siagh died 011 fhe spot. He Ijudgment of tlie Apex Court ia tlie vs. Indrajeet ® 00 and argued that offence agaiast :jctend beyond Section 304 -II of fhe a|tid, leamed counsel for the State lof fhe tiial Court. •tied couasel for the parties, in order ;nts advanced bv leanied couiisel for ^- n ::=tA£3^ ^".-"h T'r^:i:-?:''^t?'T^S!19StS^^^:?T!F^?t£.^^:?.'~\'^^%^^':4.^!{M ')^.^^^^SaiEg8ES^ yff XI-HC—78 3S^f V\ ft-IW 'tWI 3IR^T »*<]<» 3^cT^rm^r, ^^1^, Ri'tiuy thKI*.........a..A.....sn/i/....... re; V\ 200 an^nraq? (13?fgp3?) •RgTW^rfrasii^T ^ tlie appellant, we have fPW-1- wife offlie decea; Piuuii Bai (PW-1) <t>i<i!d<il-i 'wmf^^6 <Ri<4i< i? aiRm •aii^r perused tlie evidence of Puniu Bai >ed) , lias stated tliat oil Uie fateful dav, slie alongivifh lier husb^nd was sitting in. their hou.se, at fhat ttme, the accused caiae|fhere witii a fctiife'aiid attacked her. Wlien lier husbsuid cam^ to iateivene, accused attacked liim also witb the kiiite, whic.ji laaded oa his neck and he died. Case of the pro^ecution as disclosed is that tlie deceased - fafher-ia-la-n] not seuduis: fhe chudil aiid uijured - luofher-in-law were cii of fhe acctised to llis house. fiierefore, flie accused c^uie to tlieir liouse aiid abused tlieiu saying that why Uiey w^re aot sendiag liis cluldren to liis house aiid iii tlie first talstEta.ee, lie attacked Punni Bai (PW- 1), as a result ofvvlucli,] slie sustaiaed one abrasion nijiuy. Her luedical repoi-t is Ex.-|P/ 18. In fhe ineaatune, Johar Lal @ Veer Siagli, fafher-in-la'c)7 of Uie accused, canie tliere aad when he iateivened, the 4cciised, wifhoiit aiiy intenuon aU of a siidden in a lieat of p^ission attacked liiin wifli the knife, wtucli laiided on tlie sub-|claviaa arteiy, as a resiilt ofwMcIi, the art.er)7 was cut and cl|ue to profase bleeding froin it, lie died 011 fhe spot. State of KP. »s. Indrsiieet In tlie inatter of SuSchatha /Suprcy, tiie a| •cused, who was a cai-penter came to fhe spot •ndth Rukhani (^ti inipleiaent noi-mally used by the Cai-penters), attacked fh^ deceased wifh the saiue on the japuii 3]'qi3qsrand soasg-o ST^ '3-ioj| JO q+B3p 3IQ. 3SRB3 O^ Ap5[I{ -VBW. pasiiooB 31)-^ fBty. pa.uajni aq ^repss rdf ui jsnirein: pae piinoAi jo ajn^BTi 'qi.Bsp siq asneo 01 uoTiaaiaT IIB qii4 p3SR30B 3TQ. fBIQ pl3q 3q 1.0111163 fl '^; •p3Ip 3U pTIB 1.1 T[I0.1J §lIIp33{[ SBA". .U3+JB 'ipiqAi jo ^pisaj B SB 'J3P1 ipiqAi *3jiu3i 3Tp q^iA\ rorq pas[0%UB I) sq 'psasA.istai pTie SHIBO p3SB3C>3p UT 'J3A3-UOH 'SpTS 2TOT3q J3q HO Anpjj oqAi '(T-Md) P39 ro M - AIBI-U|: piii3 pasiiqe 3^[ 'SOIIB^STII l.s.ig' sip ni JTSq+ O^. 3ITO33 3q 'AB3T-TtI-.I3IpOTII pTtB| siq 01. yiss Bliisq ioa S.ISA'. pssnooB j| /4t3d B HQ 'P3ST133T3 pCTB (p3SB333p) At A^TSOTmiIB OU S13AV 3J3qi 'OS]~e 3SB; aoT^osg puoAaq giiipiia^xs 1.011 SBAV p: 4i3Tp ppq 'P:tloo sqj, •a.m^.Ba TIIsnoA; P3ST3IH: 3110 A[HO pTTB pSSrLOOB 3Tp yff lou: pip pssnoo-B 3xy. 'ajojajsq^ 'v.odv. PpTOO 3q 'p3SB303p 3Ip f[p[ o^ aoT^ag^ii •w-uit^ny I]^TA i.ods 3lp. uo 3IIIB.:) p3Sn- 3q'j^. '.Sinfai ^Bip jo tiinoooB TIO psip l^UE.hEjte^ ^ii»iy>t;>'s)'t? ).l;>>tih '•(bujbitt. 1.13Tp 'Arei-TII-JSIpBJ STl{ t'eqi agps^'&OTOi 3Lp. pisq 'o tT 'p3T[3Vf(B sq 'qoiqAl 0+ SHTSlOOl 'J3A3MOH p3SB333p 3t[^ p33{3BnB ij 3AOqE 3T^+ TIIO.IJ 3snjo.id SE-U sjSTp. '^no noqs y3[ 3ip. ao p3piiB{ ftre rarrq SP.IBAYO^ p3TLiTi+ qj. aSTlA-l 'STtTRireSCTI 310 ttoisBjq'e iie psiip^sns t-.iaip.oui siq pssf3vyfB ^ooui A.iSire 103 ai ssiioq MBj'-nT-jSTp'Bj Aq ssnoq p TisJpYiqo TisqAi jsi^m: py-OI-.ISTpBJ 3Tp H33AU3q ^H3S3jd 3lp U; •Odl stTlJO 11-VBdWe pnooe sip jo 30U3go sip f3 SBAI- p3^0TgTti panoAi f[ o^ HOCi.aai.Ttt Alte peq |IAI .TBTnSaj E pasn SABq sf sip pBq pssnooe 3lp.JI ipoB 3ip tBi]^ pisq ^.moo p3SB333p 3qi. pOB qOSH s ify»ca]»>iiiil»a (nSBEjA) >bBh i^iic «oz^......^.^..,...^......^^ ^ftl^y '°>lrrt[pt»'h-^lh-lh- ^a£ tfe»lht&Itbl^ Iteli Ibjl-b] |lt> l^lto 8Z.—3H-IX -/ XI-HG—78 3^TSlK1o5q', iSTfl'M'IS, fslcM'y^ ^nwn" **<icb ^A...^..1H..<3L an^?r iiiro (4«if-i*iijtT) WI. 200 31I^?TJR R-ii'h nair s^n so+iiqi ^RireiT^tosn^T ^ +l-4l<rl41'1 im^f ^'fe11^ •<,rflq+$K ^'sifwTan^i 3hY"i ofldnc tlierifore Sectiou 304 Part-IIj accused/appellaat. Fo^ luider Section 302 ofj sustaitied. SiiiiilaTly, tlie attackuig Punni Bai af per the injury report, t(ii tlie right side ofscapulj attacked her only oncj simple ia nature, the.record, oflence und^r IQ the result, the| The conviction accused/ appellsuit for Section 302 & 307 of he is convicted uiider S| aiid senteiiced to undlc respectively. Both tlie s( The accused slit detention period agams^ was inade out agaitist fhe fhe foregoiug reasoiis, tiie conviction tlie IPC of flie accused caanot be under Section 307 of the !PC for Iso cannot be sustaiued, because, as 4iere was one iujuiy i.e. abrasion on ^ aiid as per tlie prosecutioa case, he ^, as per laedical report, iajuiy was •^fore, for attackiag Puniii Bai as per Itr Section 324 ofthe IPC is laade out. appeal pai-tly succeeds. aad sentence imposed upoii the comiaission of fhe offence under IPC ai'e set aside. Instead thereof, bctions 304 Pai-t-II aad 324 of fhe IPC •rgo R.I. for 10 years aiid 3 yeai-s bitences shail ITIII concun'enfiy. ibll be entifled tbr set off for tlie ttie (: tlie sentence imposed llpon hini, -L Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge Sd/- SunU Kumar Sinha Judge IMI ^- lir+l'""""'. . SSSasSS^^3?^[" y.'W."9- -t'act" '5tt:""^ :t'i'E< "* SXS.-.-. ^