I Appéimnt: ‘ HIGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 1999 Harihar Prasad alias Bablu s/o. Sampat Singh Gonde, P.S. Kota, Chowki Beighana, District Bilaspur (MP). Versus State 0f Madhya Pra‘desh (new ‘r Chhattisgarh). i @fiminal appeal U/s 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973) SB: Hon’ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, J; 4 u ' Mr. Atul Pandey, counsel for the appellant. Mr. AV. Shridharl Panel Lawyer for the State. f? Pres‘ent: l l l l l l l l JUDGMENT (6-7-2009) The report of Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Bilaspur dated 10-6-2009 shows that the appellant has served out the sentence and has been released on 28-2-2002; This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22-1 2-1998 passed by lVth Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 483 of 1996, whereby the learned iVth Additional Sessions Judge, holding the appellant guilty for commission of offence under Section 307 of the IPC, sentenced him to undergo RJ. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rl for one year. The judgment is challenged on the- ground that without clinching the evidence, the court below has convicted and sentenced the appeilant as aforementioned. Respondent: 4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that §ix days before the incident i.e., on 7-8—1994 when the compiainant Kunwar Singh (PW/7) was pioughing his field, at that time, accused/appeiiant Harihar came there and told him that- the field to which the complainant was ploughing, l belonged to him. Due to this incident, accused/appellant Harihar had enmity with the complainant. On 7~8~1994 at about 8‘00 pm. the complainant Kunwar Singh(PW/7) went to the shop of his neighbour Fag'nun Singh to purchase Tobacco and sat there. After some time, ‘ . accused/appellant Harihar came there with axe (tangia), threatened and adfcked the complainant on his neck, right cheek and right shoulder as a result of which he sustained injuries. The complainant lodged a report (EXP/10) at Out Post, Belgahana. Nemkunwar (PW/8) wife of the complainant immediately reached the spot, saw her husband lying near cesspool {conduct pipe) and also she saw that the accused assaulted her husband with Tabbal and thereafter ran away. After lodging report, the complainant Kunwar Singh(PW/7) was sent to Hospital for medical examination, where Dr. AR. Banjare (PW/1 1) examined him and found thegrievous injuries on his body vide Ex. P/23 which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Dr. K.K. Sac (PW/12) also examined and found the injuries on the body of the complainant Kunwar Singh. After completion‘of the investigation, challan was fited before j Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Judge. 5.: In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined as l \l e l many as 12 witnesses. The statement of the accused/appellant was ; recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him and pleaded his innocence and x a false implication. ‘ the appeuant submits that the appeuant Learned counsel appearing for has not commltt the sentence imposed upon h the appellant be acquitted of the charges. ed any offence and he has been Teleased after sewing lm Learned counsel further submits that Per contra iearned counsel appearing for the respondent/State argued al Court. port of the judgment of the tn the case m sup ed the records Having heard learned counsel forthe parties, l have perus court as well as the impugned iudgment. A a“. bare perusal of the doctor‘s evidence shows th fthe lower at the accused d the vrctrm (Kunwar Srngh ( WI7) on his neck rrght side of uel manner and caused grievous rnrurres. Dr. ssauke A lface and cheek in a- cr K.K. Sao (PWHZ) corroborated the gh (Pwm Kunwar singh (PW/7) also deposed n the date of incident he went to shop of Faghun Singh to purc that o and then the accused Harihar assaulted him with heek. He also deposed that he lodged AR Banjare (PW/11) and Dr evidence of Kunwar Sm hase I r tobacco and sat there, ‘ Tangia on his neck, shoulder and c x 3 report (Ex P/10) at out Post Belgahana. 10, Nemkunwar (PWIS), the wife of complainant deposed that her h j usband \ he Faghun Singh. When (PWI7) went to the shop of o s lying near Cesspool (Nal) being \l. she saw her husband, he wa Kunwar Singh {3 assaulted ed with Tabbal and also saw the accused running away by the accus from the spot, iust after the ‘ncident, r The evidence of this witness has not been challenged by defence side; therefore, the evidence of Nemkunwar (PW/8) is relrabte Thus the statement of the j 9 , Kunwar Singh (PWI7) is corroborated by rosecution has proved the case beyond all \ , l (PW/8). Hence, the p complainant the deposrtron of Nemkunwar reasonable doubt. 11. Having considered all appreciating the evidence availabl the facts and circumstances of the case and after l do not find any e on record, \ @ T ‘ substance ‘m the appeal. hereby dismissed. v 1 i ‘ Sdl- R.Nhandrakar he same is liable to be dismissed and it is .C Judge