HIOH COURTOP CHHATTIBGARH; BIUMSPUR v. Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Pasel Lawyer for fbe isspondeiit/State

Per yiJaT Knmar Shrivastava. J. This appeal under Sectiou 374(2] of the Cr.P.C., directed a^inst the iudgnent of conviction aud order of sentence dated 01/11/1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jashpumagar ia Sessions Trial No.99/ 1999 by which the appellant has been held gtulty for coimaitting offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of fhe IPC aad was sentenced to undergo uuprisoument for life and to pay a fiiie of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo SI for five years. ^\ o 2) Briefly stated fhe facts, ia brief, are that fhe daughter of the deceased was abducted by fhe appellaat. After her recdvery, upon complaint of the deceased a Paachayat took place and ia that Panchayat it was resolved ttiat the daughter of the deceased should be married wifh. appellant withia two months, but iastead of keeping the daughter, deceased sent her to another place. On the date of iucident when the deceased riding bicycle was goiug towards Jashpumagar in search of his elder son nainely Basheer Khan, appetlaut on his bicycle chased him and pushed ftie bicycle of deceased who as a result of that feU down thcreafter appeUant by knife and a poiat ed rod, wielded a ntunber of injuries on the deceased Mohammad AUyar.

The iacident was witnessed by Bhhoktoram and Lochaaram. Mohaininad AMyar died on the spot. On the next day, Mohaminad Ishhaq lodged first information report and merg iatunation in fhe PoUce Station Narainpur. SHO, Naraiapur recorded bofh the reports and went to the spot to conduct fhe inquest, on the spot he conducted the inquest, prepared his repot and sent the dead body for autopsy to the Pruaary Health Centre, Narainpiir. 3) Investigatmg Officer coUected blood stained soil, control soil from the spot and also collccted one sUpper fouad on fhe spot, Bicycfc belonging to deceased was also lying there, that was coUected. AU the articles were seized. Map was prepared. Doctor Shera Toppo conducted the autopsy who ia his autopsy report described various injuries found on the body of the deceased and opined fhat the cause ofdeath was hemorrhage and shock due to fiacture of skuU boae and the nature of death was homicidal. _--QL . ..... \ si^^i isaBS«i •*\ During mvestigation, statement of witaesses were recorded, appeUazit was taken into custody and on his Bieiaoraudum statement one Kukri (knife] and a rod were seized from him.

Clothes wom by the appeUant were removed and were also seized by fhe Investigating OfEcer. Bofh the weapons recovered and seized from fhe appellant were sent to Medical Officer examination, who after examming bofh fhe weapons opined fhat the injuries found on fhe body of the deceased inight have been caused by both fhe weapons. 4) After investigation chaUaa. was led in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jashpumagar, who cominitted the case to the Court of Sessions for trial. Charge under Section 302 ofthe IPC was fi-amed against the appeUant and the saine was read over and explained to him, who abjured fhe guilt His defence was ftiat lus hands and legs are weak, fherefore, neither he caa hold auything ui his right hand nor can run fast, He has been falsely impUcated ia the cnme due to animosity. 5) Learaed trial Court veiy meticulously appreciated aU the aspects aad evidence avaUable on record and after considering, found bofh the eye witnesses rcUable as also the weapons recovered fiioni the appeUant and the clothes wom by hiTn were blood stained and the circumstance that the appcUant fled away fiTom the spot and was abscondiug for some period and the motive held the appeUant guilty for committmg murder of Molianunad Aliyar punishable under Section 302 of fhe IPC and accordiagly convicted aad sentf; nced him.

4 "-s' 6) Injuries fouud on the body of Mohamm.ad AUyar, cause of death and also the iiature of his deafh i.e., homicidal in nature are not disputed by fhe appellant, Even othenvise, from the evidence of Dr. Shera Toppo (PW/9) and autopsy report (Ex.P/ 15), it is evident aud proved that foUowing iujuries were found on fhe body of Mohaminad AUyar who died as a result of hemorrhage and shock due to fracture of skult bone and injuiy on the brain and his death was homicidal ui aature. If Incised waund over left ocdpital region, verliocdhf sese 1 % x % ey fo &one betow ffiis # cut frescturtng oaapital bone belaw this injury to brcdn oerebral Tnembrane cut. Inased wound over left ear region two in 2) numbers, trcmsversely each one sisse 1 Wx ^i' x 1'. 3} Indsed wound over lefl side offace svae 1 1A' x 16" bone deep, below th.is fractwe of left mcmdible cut. •'l) Indsed waund on. left side offrorvtal region size 1 ' W x Vz' x bone deep below this cut fracture # of Jrorria! bone cut.

5/ Indsed wound on lefl oodpUal region back ofthe ear sis:e 1 W x W x bone deep. 6) Indsed wound over mid-occipitat regicrt, size 1 % x W bone deep below this cuf Jracture ft qf ocdpita[ bone cut. 7) Two indsed waunds over rmd ocdpifal region size 1 W x ^" x bone deep beSozu fftis frcK^ure (cui) # ofbone injury to cerebrcd membrane brcdn cut. 8) Two indsed wounds cut on mid frontal region vertioctlly eaafe s»se 7 %' x W bone deep below this cut fracfure # of bone cut below this iryury to cerebra! m.embrccne and brain cu(. 9) Indsed wound cut on rmd parietal region size 1 % x W x bone deep. 10) Incised wound on righl pcuietal reyonsize 1 %' x fy verticaVy. -, Inased lagund on right ftvntal region size l' x 11) ly x 1 cm. ' M^ 12) Two indsed wounds cut over mid and right side ofnedc size l' xW xl* cut oftrcu^teal oartilage cut. 7) Bhokto Ram (PW/2) and Lochan Ram (PW/3) have deposed ia their statements that the appeUaat wielded injuries to Aliyar Hussain.

Bhokto Ram (PW/2) also stated fhat fhe appeUant mflicted number of injuries on vadous parts of the body of Aliyar Hussain by knife. Lochaa Ram (PW/3) also stated that the appeUant by mcans of some rod. Uke weapon assaulted and caused pierced injuries on the body of Aliyar Hussain. Bofh fhese witnesses were cross exammed at lengfh, but nothmg substantial has been eUcited froni fheir cross examiaation so as to discredit fheu- oral version. Meinoraadum. stateiaent of appellaat is Ex. P/3 and on his meiuorandum statement Kukn (kaife) and a pointed rod have been recovered and seized vide Ex.P/4. Both these documents have been proved by fhe witaesses Piyush Toppo (PW/10) and Bhushan Ekka (PW/5). Piyush Toppo (PW/10) in his stateinent also stated fhat both the seized weapons were sent for raedical examination. Medical Officer Dr. Shera Toppo (PW/9) in his statement estabUshed that he examined both fhese weapons and opiued that the iajurics found on the body of the deceased could have been caused by fhese weapons.

Kyush Toppo (FW/ 10) farther proved fhat aU the articles seized were sent for chemical exammation to FSL and FSL report is Ex.P/18. Report (Ex.P/18] establishes fhe presence of blood on bofh fhe seized weapons. Therefore, it is also estabUshed (hat weapous seized fi-om the possessioa of fhe appeUant were contamuig blood steias. Hyush Toppo (PW/ 1Q) also proved fhe fact that the clothes wom by the appeUant were reiuoved aad seized vide Ex.P/8) and fhese clothes ^ were also seut to FSL. From fhe report (Ex.P/18), it is also estabUshed that these clofhes were stained wifh blood. 8) Adniittedfy, the daughter ofdeceased was taken by fhe appeUaat aud when she came back wifh appeUant, on ftie complaiut of deceased, a Panchayat was convened aud in that Panchayat it was decided that the girl should be married to appeUant within two months, but io.stead of impleiaeiiting the ordain deceased sent the girl to the house of her matrimonial uncle.

Both fhe eye wituesses Bhokto Ram (PW/2) and Lochan Ram. (PW/3) are viUagers. They have no aainiosity or grudge to impUcate the appeUant falsely in fhe case. They have deposed in. the Court whatever tfaey saw. Their oral evidence is duly corroborated wifh. niedical evidence as stated above. That apart, their evidence is also corroborated wifh the fact of recoveiy of weapons and the clothes found on fhe body of the appeUant those aU. having blood staincd to which no explanation has becn ofifered by the appeUant. Even motive to comiait fhe offence is also apparent. 9) Therefore, taking iuto consideration atl fhese facts, we are of fhe considered view fh.at fhe learued trial Court has correctly appreciated fhe evidence fix>m aU the aspects and correctly convicted and sentenced the appeBant. 10) In the result, the appeal is devoid of aay substance, fherefore, fhe same is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed—- -——. Sdf- V.K.Shrivastava Judge 16/06/2006 16/06/2006 Rqju