Judgment · High Court · 2005
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 19 Dec 2005
- Bench
- VIJAY
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 302
Judgment
D^ ; HON'BLB SHRI LAL CHAi HON'BLE SHRI VIJAY Kl DBHADOO.J. AND MAR SHRIVASTAVA. J. 19-12-2005 Mrs, Kiraii Jaia, coi Mr. Ashish Shukla, Mr. Sachm Siagh R< respondent/State. ^nsel for fhe aecused/ appeUaat lAdditlorial PubUc Prosecutor aad ^jput, PaaelLawyerforfhe Heard. ORAL [UDGMENT l^ By appeal, accused/appellaiit Sodhi Lachctihoo has questioned fhe legality of judgment of convictlon and order of sentence dated 21-12-1995 passed by Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur iir Sessions Trial No, 236/94, whereby leaaied Sessions Judge, after hQldiagi Ihe accused/appeUant guUty for coininission of fhe offence und^ ;r Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, serLtenced hnn to iindergc^ iaiprisoninent for Itfe. 2, The case of fhe pro] secution, in brief, is fhat, on 15-3- 1994 &t about 8 P.M,,the dec^ ^ased Podiya came to the house of r^^fe^ XI-HC-22 3Ti^T^T f^-lich 3Tli¥T 'yRa 5t?^iicti ^oc[ r^||q|<nq, ^frOT^, fa^l^y 'STT^T 'q^? WWTT 5h^l<=h :2l^""""""""^ 200 •f^^T' <=hMid^1T1 "^TFRTf ^ ft^ <M^K '^3Tf^W3TT^T '.'. Pandu along wifh. SodhLPide, P,1 W. -3 to sit bv the fire side to warm the body. At fhat time, the acctised Sodhi Lachchhoo caine with aa Axe aiid due to aiiimosity 4xi account of fhe Mquor, started quarrelmg wititi Podiya aad attabked hitn with fh.e Axe on neck, head aad laoufh/ aad as a resultj of which, hedied spontaaeousty. P.W.-3;Sodhi Pide iafojmied to F| .W.-4, Sodhi HidBia, who ti7ent to fhe house of Podiya aad saw the ^lead body of Podiya aiid apprised fhe villagers about fhe iaciden( aad lodged a rcport iri Police Station Kuvakonda. After ^stenng the case, - Police Of5cer Jaoirain Dhruv, P.W.-6 caoie to the scene of occurrcnce aad prepared a Panchnaoia, Ex. F7 oflfhe dead body of Podiya aad sent tlie body for post inortein fb Pri|maiY Health Centre, Kuvakonda, where Dr.Haasraj Verma, P.W,-: body of Podiya aad prepared a p|ost conducted post mortem on -the niorteni report, Ex.P-1. "After completion of the mvestigation, a charge-sheet was filed ixi tlie Court of Judicial Magistrate Firj Fufet Class, Daatewada, wherefroin learaed Sessions Judge received <|he case on coiGL^lttal for trial. + [Ti^^f^ XI-HC-22 ws( ^i^M-4. "^frwrs. I^R^ 3^li?f .qW^ WW11 5b^lcb 'I^^T" ^200 ,'371^1 ^T 'f^ri^'STT^T 5t)+11<^ ^TT^T 3:IT^T^<H^^rf^ chNld^"l ^l^dT feTst <M^K '^'S^THW^r "^ •^;-
The prosecution, ia order to prov^ thte chax^e agamst the accused, exaimned 6 witnesit ^es, On the other Haad, stateiaent of fhe accused was recorded ulnder Section 313 of the Code of Crimidal Procedure, ia which, ^ denied the prosecution evidence aad stated fhat he has been falsA >^ly miplicated ia fhe crune.
Leamed Sessions Ji idge, after hearing the ai'guinents of leamed couiisel for both tfiel f parties, convicted aad sentenced the aecused as laentioned in pai^ 1 of this jiidginent 5, We have heard the clouiisel for the parties. The fact of homicidal nature of death of leamed couhsel for the accused flodiya has not been disputed by rappellao.t, Apart from that, eye- witnesses naBiely Sodhi Kpsi, P.1|¥, .^.-2 aad Sodhi Pide, P.W.-3, have 't^ stated that, fhey witaessed th^ crime and P.W. -1, Dr, Haasraj Verma has stated that, he condiil ijcted fhe post mortem on tlle body ^ of Podiya and he noficed 6 inju^ies ii|ies on tiie .body, and opmed that fhe deafh of Podiya was homicid^l ia nqture aad tlie mjunes were + [Tft^^fe^ ~~r XI-HC-22 ^^ ^Tpn^; ^^^ fa^i<iy 'q^? 3?7^T "^200 WH^{ ^b^icb —^— 'IN^sr' STT^T'^T' Rrli?b 3T1^¥I 9^^i<=t» ^f^a '^TTW 'Cf^T 31T^T t^i<Li(cn<i1i i^TR^ff "^ '^3Tf?<R3TI^T Ife^t <pfl^i< sufficient ia tiie orduiary couilse of nature to cause fhe deafh. ^ , Therefore; iti view' of fhe above evidence of the eye-witaesses aad Uie inedical evidence, it is est^ LbUshed fhat, fhe deafh. pf Podiya was hoinicidal ia nature, v . . • -
So far as <j uestion of uivolveinent of accused/appeUaat in. fhte cnmie| in question is concenied, P.W.-2, Sodhi Kosihas stated fh.at, Sodjhi Podiya along wifh his wtfe caine to his house. At tliat tune, th|< |e aecused caine witli ao. Axe aad attacked Sodhi Podiya repeatedl] ^, as a result of which,-Podiya died on the spot and tiie accused rai^ away, So is fhe evidence of Sodhi Pide, P.W.-3, who has corrobo|rated fhe evidence of Sodhi Kosi, P.W.-2, aad ia fhe cross-exami^iatlqn of fhese wifa.esses, nofhin.g has been eUcited, which iaake| fhe evidence of these witaesses unreUable or untrustwdrthy. |The evidence of Uiese witaesses stand corroborated by tlie medi [cal evidence of P.W.-l, Dr.Haiisraj Venaa, who has stated that, on 17-3-1994, he conducted the post iiiortein on the body of Sodlii I|>odiya aad found that tiiere was a + s [Tit^ ^Rsi^ XI-HC-22 ^aE[ Tznzn^-q, ^Tily^co, fa ^ 1^1 y 'q^? 3?T^T ^I+IC-II 5h^icb —^^- '^R^8T" '^ 200 3^r^ ^ipb ^Tli^T 5t>^i<=h ^f^a w^r ^^TTW ^a i=hi^(<rr>&fl<i ^i^<y?i ^ Fs^l <P!I^I< iT3Tf^P:T37T^T "^\.. cut mjury of fhe sharp edged w^apon on fhe right side of the chest below fhe nipple ia fhe size of |11/2 iaches x 1 iach.
There was a stab wouiid on fhe occipital re|gion ia fhe size of 2% itiches x ^4 to.ch aad it was deep upto cra|oial cavity aad ori^accpunt of ihis # :!-;1'-' . iojuxy, the fluid inatter of fbe b jraui was conmig put aiid the skuU, duraoiaifer aad braia were also <fcut. <fcut. There was a stab wound ia tlie nght haiid, There was a cut wc|iuid on tfae left hand, There was a stab wound in ,fhe left haad|and fherc was aa iajur^7 on fhe dorsuin of the left haad. He ha^ furfher stafed fhat, on account of fhe iajury No.2, skuU was j&kctured aad duramaiter was also fractured, AU fhe iajuxies we|re aati niort^ni aad honiicidal iD. nature. Therefore; ia view o| ftie above evidence of the eye- witnesses aad fhe inedical elvidence, fhe iiivolveraent of the accused/ appeUant ia coBiinitti^ itti^lg fhe inurder of Sodhi Podiya is estabUshed aad fhe finduig of trial Court is based on the legal evidence. The saine does no^ requirc any uiterference by this Court, The injuries were uifllct^d 1 by fhe accused ia such a brutal maarier tiiat tlie skuU of fhel deceased was fraetured aiid he + [Tft^ ^Ra^ XI-HC-22 -^^ -^pTT^r^, -S-r^^ (^<niff3< sni^r 1^ra^ ^IH^ll 9b^fich "^""'"""""""^T 200 •^^T:--"--" -STT^T^r 'f^ri^rw^ sti^w ^f^a 37T^T '^TTW '^f^r chl^fd4l^ ^Hdf ft^ <pti^i^ '^3rt^PT3?n^T "^ repeatedly assaulted wifh aa Axe aiid caused 6 iajuries on th.e.vital parts of the^body, Thercfore, |we do not jBiid aiiy gi'ound to mterfere th^ trial< Court convictuig accused/appellant for conmiissi^ bn of fhe oiffence under Section 302 of the Indiaa Penal Code ^iid sentenciiig hiai to undergo taiprisoninent for life. The appea^ is devoid of inent.
In the result, the ap] eal is Uable to bc dismissed aiid is accordiagly disinissed, Sd/.. L.C, Bhadoo Judge Sd/- V.K. Shrivatava Judge <i-^-^ ^- G.Slagh + ^ [Tft^ ^R^^
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Chhattisgarh High Court, on 19 Dec 2005. The bench was VIJAY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.