an^r ^T f^Th?; as(T an^r gniNi ^ST^IPTTcTq', giTfi^'ie, Rfcliyy ^WWI Stltllch WT 200 3TT^?T T3W (^f3q^8r) ?THTWHl%(T3{1^T HI6H COURT OF &IVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. L C.BHA&OO & HON'BLE MR, b APPELLANT Vs RESPONbENT Dilhait Culti^ (Bhac| C)istri| The (Polic^ Colle< Present; AAr, J.R, Verma, Advocate for t| Atr. b.K. Swalre, Addl. Public Pr O R A L Per L.C. Bhadoo. ^i Today, this appeal is suspension of sentence and g appeal. During the course of judgment of the tria! court ai case the accused/appellant hi surmises A conjectures, there ^iqfepfrr >TOrTt ff fs^t Tf^TRK ^aTl^iTsn^r HHATTISeARH AT BILASPUR IRENbRAMISHKA, JJ APPEAL N0,483/2007 an Sahu, S/o Pardeshi, aged 25 years, rtor and resident of Villaqe Bhatqaon ipara Chauk), in the Tahsil Bilaigarh, ct Raipur (C.6.) itate of Chhattisgarh through Station Bilaigarh, District Raipur) or, District Raipur ie appeliant, isecutor for the respondent-State. JUbfiftENT (ltth July, 2007) jsted for hearing on I.A. No. 1/2007 for •ant of bail during the pendency of this i]irguments, we have perused the record A )d perusal of the same shows that in this \s been convicted merely on the basis of ^s no tegal evidence in order to connect the P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3T^r^>Tfei°F <rar 3-n^T gOTNp s^'.^raicPT, ®€t?fTre,'w^wy. tTTH^I »>+1|t« WT 200 3TT^?T IRW (ijcil^^ff) ^rarwA'3^ ^rafcpfrr IWICTT'ff teA ri^ZK Sfi3lf^Il;ff1^ • accused/appellant with the cri|me in question and therefore, we decided to to which learned counsel to the respective dispose of this appeal itself, parties gave their consent. This appeat is directed ^gainst the judgment of conviction and orcier of sentence dated 3 ASay, 20^)7 passed by !earned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, District l^aipur in Sessions Trial No.374/06 whereby learned Additionat Sessions Jfudge after holding the accused/appellant guih-y for commission of offe/fce under Sections 450, 302 & 201 of the IPC, sentenced him to underglo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fin®of Rs.100/-, in default of paymer|it of fine to further undergo R.I. for ons month; R.I. for life and to poy iji fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. fo|' one inonth & R.I. for 7years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default of p]ayment of fine to further undergo R.I, for one month respectively. All tljie sentences have been directed to run concurrently. Case of the prosecution, n brief, is that Pardeshi Ram Sahu, father- of present accused/appeltant 4 ^0" °f deceased Manglin Bai, iodged c report (Ex.P-10) in the Police Oitt'post Bhatgaon, Police Station Bilaigarh to the effect that on 11.7.2006 at^about 10.30 p.m. he along with his children was sitting in the house| Bai (since deceased) used to re; after taking dinner. His mother JIAangalin Ide with his brother Krishan Kumar in the adjoining house and the gate c|f that house is on the other side, His P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3^'^TFn^PT, »Tfly'16,fai-ltyy *41*<(fTTSb*'n^ ^ 200 3T1^?T ira^T (>^q(^si q<T) W^T'RT f?-IW ;raT an^r sRqra; ^RITWtrfN'STI^T "RrafeN^ IWRTT'ir'tec^-if^Rsrc ^sTl^iTsn^r resiqing roiom after brother Krishan Kumar is reside all alone in the house ofl smoke coming out from the raised the cries regarding fire) that side, the door was close<|l house after breaking open the the courtyard. He along with has set her-self on fire aftel Receiving this merg intimatio| scene of occurrence and prepared the inquest (Ex.P-2) 12) of the place of occurrence| and site plan (Ex.P-17) was Mangalin Bai was sent for Centre, Bilaigarh under Exjl conducted the postmortem, pr|( the cause of death was injury the death was homicidal in (Ex.P-18), F.I.R. Ex.P-13 was re|( During the snves+igatio^i memorandum (Ex.P-3) and was used for attacking in Korba, therefore, his mother used to Krishan Kumar. All of a sudden he saw the of his mother. DukhQtram also saw and He along with other villagers went towards from inside, therefore, they entered the ]door and saw that his mother was burning in ^illagers extinguished the fire. His mother pouring kerosene on her body and died. i|i, the Inw.stigiition Officer left for the giving notice (Ex.P-1) to the Panchas ^n the body of Mangatin Bai. Slte plan (Ex.P- was prepared by the Investigating Officer ^repared by the Halka Patwari. Body of pt>stmortem examination to Primary Heatth JP-19 whe.re Dr. Narayan Singh (PW-9) '|epared the report (Ex.P-18) and opined thct ^n the chest, excessive bleeding & shock a"d r^ature. Based on the postinorteiTi i'eporf 'lgistered. s+dted i, the accused while in police custody gave thaf he is producing Iron Ko.de, which Mangtilin Bai. Said iron Kada was seized under P.T.O. XI-HC-78 'SSI -^WM^, tSlTDy'Ko, [affliyy *TTR^IT Sti+llth Wi[ 200 341^1 >4ach (yat^si^a') 3TI^T i?iT f^rffi craTan^rgiiTN? SRtTWfff^rsn^T sRrafep'frr wirrf ^'tec^ (fSrRTC ^; srf^ET STI^T r Kfcida' Ex.P-4. Based on the informatilon was prepared. Iron "Kada" wa^ under Ex.P-22 for his opinion, that it was possible that the, could be caused by said iron "I injuries could be caused other^ After completion of usj the Court of Judicia! Magistt commitl'ed the case to learnedl 2 Additional Sessions Judge prosecution in order to examined 16 witnesses. Statenlent 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he p! falsely implicated in the crime. Learned Additional Sessji learned counsel for the respe accused/appellant, as aforemei We have heard Mr. J.R. D.K. Swalre, Addi. Public Prosei Having heard learned record and judgment of the tri given by the accused Panchano.mo. Ex,P-5 sent to the medical officer, PI-IC Bilaigafh vho gave his report vide Ex.P-19 and opined njuries found on the body of Mangalin Boi ida" in question. He further opined that the 'ise also. ml investigation, charge sheet was filed m •ate 1 Class, Baloda Bazar, who m turn [Sessions Judge, Raipur from where learned •eceived the case on transfer for trial. Th® est]ablish the charges against the accused of accused was recorded under- Section leolded innocence and stated that he has been ions Judge affer hearing the arguments of i^tive parties, convicted and sentenced the ttioned. Verma, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. |utor for the respondent/State. co|unsel for the parties, we have perused the iblcourt. P.T.O. XI-HC-78 35T ^ll<41d'4, ®Tfl<H'l<S,Rldiyy tTTH^TTaiflKh ^ 200 311^1 4^i*> (T^3^^) 3TI^T^iTR-fi«b cT8TT3n^T5h^||ch ^FarwHf^crsn^r ^iqfepfl^ Wraf tf fWt rf^TRK ^sTRTR-sn^r In this case virtually •)•! record to connect the accusedk Pardeshi Ram Sahu, fother of the report (Ex.P-10) and in tj' mother died on account of bul pouring kerosene on the body| sent for postmortem exomina-tji 9) noticedthat there were inji were found fractured. aftel conclusion thdt the couse of d^ into teft lung and damaged the| blood. The burn injuries on the| the case was registered and in^ PW-1 Durpaf has not involvement or motive of the Bai, PW-2 Panchdas Panika is| accused gave memorandum anc| he was wearing at that time, «t| the witness of seizure of 01 Mangalin Bai. Pardeshi Ram has not stated anything agains crime in question. Even in the r\ •here is no legally admissible evidence m 'appellant with the crime in question. PW-4 hhe accused and son of the deceased, lodqed |ie said report- he has mentioned that her- •n injuries as she set herself on fire after Thereafter, the body of Mangalinbai wcs fon and during postmortem the doctor (PW- ^ries on the chest, 5th & 6 ribs of left side opening the body he reached to the ath was fracture of ribs, which penetrated |left lung, whole chest was full of water like body were after the death and therefore, ['estigation started. anything in his evidence regarding the jiccused to commit the murder of Alangaiin the village Kotwar and he has stated that based on that iron Kada in question, which itas seized from him. PW-3 Sunaram Sahu is te kerosene tin, ma+ch box and hairs of (PW-4) has been declared hostile and he ^t the accused which connect him with ths iporl- (Ex.P-10), which was lodged by him, he P.T.O. stbted Sahu <=' XI-HC-78 3 T "4i^id^, fiTfly'ie, Riniyy »n+<^i sbl<ict> ^T 200 3Ti^?r craw (i^fg^y) an^T^iils-fi'b (raT311^Tsb11»b ^cITWflfN'sn^T +i^td41^ trpra:r TT'fs^ I^KSK ^3rf^PT3I1^T has mentioned that his mothed on her body and died on accoL) other witnesses have not stateli the crime in question. Based on the evidence that the accused gave memor) the Kada, which he was wearinl he attacked Mangalin Bai with accused with the crime in ques1 on the kada in question in orde| question. AAoreover, the Kada opinion vide Ex.P-19 and he gave the injuries found on the chei injuries can be caused even oth on this recovery of Kada the a in question. Virtually, as has been m admissible evidence in this casi question and to connect the deceased for committing the caused her death and that the screen himaelf from the leq set herself on fire after pouring kerosene it of burn injuries sustained by her. Even anything which connecf-s the accused with >f PW-10 Dinbandhu Uikey who has stated indum (Ex.P-3) based on that he produced at the time of incident. He disclosed that hat Kada, the trial court has connected the ion, but no blood or anything else was found to connect the accused with the crime in in question was sent to the doctor for his his opinion vide Ex,P-20 to the effect that ^ can be caused by Kada in question, the srwise without this Kada. Therefor-e, based :cused cannot be connected with the crime sntioned earlier, there is no iota of lega!^ to connect the accused with the crime in laccused that he entered the house of ^ffence, that he ottacked Magaiin Bai A |iccused set A<an9alin Bai on fire in order to (I punishment for commift'ing murder c-f P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3^ "Mi'Mtt-i'ii, ®Tfly'ie,(sicii+iy <^1*1MI sh^lti ^ 200 an^TiTg^? (yiI^si^iT) 3f1^Ti?>Tf^Tffi TOT3TI^TsFiJri^ ??dTW:Bf?cr3n^T .iiN^frr wTOt'ir'teil-d^Rzre ^ari^R'sn^T Roshan/- Mangalin Bai. Therefore, learn|ed and sentenced the accused/apf|el!ant on record. The Presiding Offic^r he does not knowthe basic prii^ciple convicted and sentencedthe adcused For The foregoing rea^ under Sections 450, 302 & 2Q1 those sections cannot be sustaihed Additional Sessions Judge has convicted withqut any iota of evidence available is a very senior officer but it seems that iciple of criminal iaw and that is why he has without anyevidence on record. ions, the conviction of accused/appellant of the IPC and sentences imposed under In the result, the appe \t\ filed by the appellant succeeds and the same is allowed. Conviction of 4ppet!ant under Sections 450, 302 & 201 of the IPC and sentences imposed He is acquitted of that charge required in any other case. under those sections are hersby set aside, i and he be set at liberty forthwith, if not Sd/-, L.C. Bhadoo Judgc Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.