Koriya (C.G.) v. The State of Chhattisgarh Through
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:8697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHA TTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 2184 of 2024 1 - Devlal Pando S/o Bacchelal, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village-Bade Sarastal, Police Station Manendragarh, District-Koriya (C.G.). 2 - Ramkumar @ Kondu S/o Manraj, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Chhote Sarastal, Pandopara, Police Station- Manendragarh, District-Koriya (C.G.) ... Appellants versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Manendragarh, District-Koriya (C.G.) ---- Respondent ___________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL ___________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board 19/02/2025
Facts
1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard 2 finally. 2. The appellants have been filed the instant appeal under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023 questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.11.2024 passed by the Second Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, District Koriya (C.G.) in Special Trial No.52/2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced punishable under Section 304 Part-II of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine amount of Rs.1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine amount additional rigorous imprisonment for one month. 3. Brief facts of this case is that on 23.03.2020 at about 05:00 PM, the appellants were came in front of house of the deceased- Rajman Bai and committed marpit with Rambaran and Keshav. Thereafter, Rambaran Pando had used filthy language to the deceased in the name of calling the appellants and caused injury in her head by lathi. Then the deceased lodged the report against her father- Rambaran Pando on account of this, Crime No.95/2020 has been registered against Rambaran Pando for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323 IPC and police sent the deceased for her medical treatment, during treatment, she died on 25.03.2020 then the offence under Section 302 of IPC has been added and made the appellants as accused in the crime and arrested them. 4. After completion of investigation, police submitted final report and 3 the trial Court on the basis of the material available in the charge- sheet had framed the charges under Section 294, 302 read with Section 34 IPC. 5. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellants. 6. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 25 witnesses. However, no defence witness was examined by the appellants. Statement of the appellants under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein they pleaded innocence and false implication. 7. On completion of the trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned in paragraph two of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.
Legal Reasoning
deceased, therefore, prima facie the offences are not made out against the appellants. The named FIR has been lodged by the deceased/complainant- Rajman Bai only against her father and she has not used a single word against the appellants relating to cause injury to her, therefore, the appellants are entitled for acquittal for the charges. He further contended that the trial Court committed illegality in not considering the specific evidence that on the same day a counter FIR has also been lodged by the appellant No.1 against Rambaran Pando, Keshav Pando and Rajman Bai Pando which was registered as Crime No.96/2020 at PS Manendragarh that has not been considered by the trial Court, which is illegal. It is further contended that from perusal of the entire evidence, it is clear that even by accepting the whole case of prosecution, it would reveal that the incident took place in spur of movement and there is no preparation of motive for causing injury of any nature to the deceased. It is further contended that prosecution has failed to adduce any cogent and reliable piece of evidence to prove the guilt of appellants. Without there being any sufficient, cogent and clinching evidence/material available on record, conviction of appellants is not sustainable. 9. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the State supported the impugned judgment and contended that the impugned judgment 5 passed by the trial Court is based on proper appreciation of material and evidence available on record and the same requires no interference. 10. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record of the trial Court and other material available on record with utmost circumspection. 11. Shanti Bai (PW-1), mother of the deceased- Rajman Bai has stated in her Court statement that it has been almost two years since the incident. Accused Devlal killed Rajman. She was cooking food at the time of the incident, then her daughter Rajman Bai called out to her to save, then she came out of the house and saw that accused Devlal Pando was beating her daughter Rajman Bai with a stick and accused Ramkumar Pando was also with him, her daughter Rajman Bai was injured in the head and chest, due to which she fell on the ground, then she started shouting, then the neighbors of her village came to the spot of the incident. After that both the accused fled from there. 12. Rambaran Pando (PW-7), father of the deceased – Rajman Bai has stated in his Court statement that on the date of the incident, she had gone to graze the cow. On hearing a commotion from his daughter Rajman Bai's house he left the cow and rushed to house. He saw that Rajman Bai was lying unconscious on the road near her house. He 6 calmly told his wife to pick her up and take her home. After that he picked Rajman Bai up and brought her home. As he could not arrange for a vehicle he brought her to Manendragarh Hospital the next morning. After examining Rajman Bai in Manendragarh Hospital, she was referred to the District Hospital Baikunthpur, where she died during treatment. 13. This witness has stated in Para- 5 of the cross-examination that he asked Devlal Pando why they were fighting, he had a stick in his hand, when he objected he said that he would hit him and ran towards him to hit, then accused Devlal fell down and his stick was thrown far away and he picked it up. He further stated that then he shouted for help, then Bachhe Lal, Raju, Keshav Pando, Hiralal came there and intervened. 14. This witness has stated in Para-6 of the cross-examination that he saw injuries on the head, chest and body of Rajman Bai, whom the accused Devlal and Ramkumar had beaten and thrown down and also dragged. He do not know that the accused had beaten his daughter with sticks, hands and fists and injured her due to old enmity. The witness voluntarily said that the accused Devlal Pando had caught the hand and arm of his other daughter. Regarding this matter, his daughter Rajman Bai had filed a report against the accused Devlal Pando. 7 15. Keshav (PW-10), brother of the deceased has stated in his statement that on the time of incident, when he heard his father Rambaran shouting for help. On hearing his father's voice, he reached 50 meters away from Rajman's house with Kaju Lal and saw that Devlal was running to hit his father Rambaran and Devlal fell down. Devlal's father Bachhelal was also there and Heera Singh of the village was also there. His father Rambaran and Bachhelal were pulling a stick, that stick was in his father's hand. After that he came towards his sister Rajman Bai's house, then he saw that Rajman Bai was lying on the road in front of her house. Rajman Bai had an injury on her head from which blood was oozing out. On the next day, his sister Rajman Bai was treated at the District Hospital Baikunthpur overnight and she died during the treatment. 16. Dr. O.L. Burman (PW-11) has stated in his statement that on 24/03/2019 at 9.15 am, Constable Prasanna Mohanty came the injured for examination. On examination, he found that both the parietals of the head were 2 inches long straight and scattered injuries. The above injury was inflicted by a hard and blunt weapon. The injury was within 15 to 20 hours. After first aid, considering the nature of the injury, she was referred to the District Hospital, Baikunthpur for treatment and examination. The examination report given by him is Exhibit P-12. 8 17. With regard to the death of the deceased, the trial Court relied upon the statement of Dr. A.K. Singh (PW-22) and the post- mortem report of the deceased is (Ex.P/29). This witness has conducted the postmortem of the deceased Rajman Bai. On postmortem, he found that the there was stiffness in both her hands and feet after death. Her head was bandaged. A cannula was attached to her right hand. There was blackness around her right eye. Her external genitals were healthy. The following injuries were found on her body- (I). A torn injury on the left side of the head which was from the left frontal region to the left parietal region, whose size was 10 cm X 1 cm. That wound was like a dried wound. The injury went deep into the muscles and the frontal bone was broken. The broken bone was broken at two-three places. There was a blood clot present with it. (ii). There was a torn injury in the middle of the head on the upper part of the vertex region which was 1 inch away from the previous injury. Its size was 5 × 0.5 cm. Its depth was bone fracture down to the muscles. The injury was oblique. The blood had dried up. The shape of the injury was irregular. (iii). Internal examination- The bone in the vitex region of the skull was broken and compressed inside. Right frontal bone was broken. There was a blood clot there. Its size was 3 inches X 3.5 inches and 9 5.5 inches X 3.5 inches. Apart from this, blood clots were found in other internal parts of his brain. There was blood-mixed foam in the throat and windpipe. Apart from this, both the chambers of the lungs were congested. There was some blood present in both the chambers of the heart. The large vessels were normal. The membrane, intestinal membrane, esophagus were normal. Water-like substance was found in the stomach. Faecal metal was present in the large intestine. Both intestines were distended due to gas. Liver was pale. Spill and kidney were mildly congested. Bladder was empty and normal. Uterus was enlarged in size and was found to be like a peter's (like a small child who is around 15 days old). 18. This witness has opined that, the injuries sustained by the deceased were before death. They could have been caused by hard or blunt objects. The duration of the injuries was two to three days and the injuries were life-threatening. In his opinion, the deceased died due to head injury, coma, cardiac and respiratory arrest. The duration of which was 6 to 12 hours. It was written that the nature of the cause would be decided on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The post- mortem report is Exhibit P-29. 19. Looking to the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution, in considered opinion of this Court that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants for the aforesaid offences. I do not find any 10 infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment of the trial Court. Thus, conviction of appellants is hereby affirmed. 20. As regards the quantum of sentence, considering that incident in question took place in the year 2020 and now almost 04 years have passed. During these years, appellants must have suffered tremendous mental trauma and anguish of trial. The offence was committed by the appellants spontaneously due to heat of anger with lathi and hit the deceased- Rajman Bai once on the head, due to which she fell down and during treatment she died. Looking to the evidence available on the face of record, it is crystal clear that the appellants had no intention to kill the deceased. The incident has taken place with sudden provocation and heat of passion and without any premeditation, the incident has taken place and there is no motive available to kill Rajman Bai. The appellants have already undergone more than 04 years and 06 months of substantive sentence imposed by trial Court, this Court is of the opinion that sentence imposed by trial Court upon the appellants (RI for 10 years) appears to be on higher side. So keeping in view all the circumstances, mentioned above, ends of justice will be served if the sentence imposed upon appellants is reduced from RI 10 years to RI 05 years. 21. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. However, fine sentence imposed by trial Court is maintained. 11 22. With the aforesaid observations, the instant appeal is partly allowed to the extent shown above. 23. Records of the Court below be sent back along with copy of this judgment for information and necessary compliance. Vasant Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge
Arguments
8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the trial Court has wrongly been convicted and sentenced the appellants without there being any sufficient evidence available on record. He further contended that the appellants had not committed any crime as alleged before the trial Court, the general dispute has been done with Rambaran Pando (PW-7, father of the deceased- Rajman Bai) and Keshav Pando (PW-10, brother of the deceased- Rajman Bai), 4 Rambaran Pando had aggressive and committed marpit with the