CHANDRAPAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH (EARLIER M.P.)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 1812 of 1998.

(2.) As per the case of prosecution, the deceased Kumari Brindabai was the daughter of Bhagirathi Kumhar who belonged to the caste Kumhar. The deceased Kanhaiya Siddar was the resident of village Panjhar and belonged to the caste Siddar (Gaur). There was a love affair going on between Kumari Brindabai and Kanhaiya Siddar, which the said Bhagirathi and his brother Chandrapal did not approve. On 2/12/1994, both Kumari Brinda and Kanhaiya went missing. A search was made, however, no missing report was lodged. On 11/12/1994, at about 09:00 am, Lodhu (PW-2) went to Kajubadi (Cashew Nursery) and saw that the dead bodies of the deceased Kumari Brinda and Kanhaiya were hanging on a cashew tree. He therefore came back and informed the Sarpanch Baran Singh Thakur. Their bodies were in decomposed state and were not identifiable, however the informant Chandrapal identified the dead bodies. Thereafter, Merg intimations were lodged by Chandrapal and Bholasingh (PW-4) at about 16:00 hrs. and 16:05 hrs. on 11/12/1994, which were registered at no. 67/94 and 68/94 respectively. The dead bodies were sent for postmortem. In the postmortem report of the deceased Kumari Brinda (Ex. P/22), conducted by Dr. R.K. Singh (PW-13), it was opined that the ligature mark over her neck was antemortem in nature, and the cause of death appeared to be Asphyxia due to hanging. In the postmortem report (Ex. P/23) of the deceased Kanhaiya also, it was opined that the cause of death appeared to be Asphyxia due to hanging. In both the postmortem reports, it was stated that the death had occurred within 8 to 10 days and the nature of the death was suicidal. As per the further case of the prosecution, on 2/12/1994, the deceased Kanhaiya was sitting at the premises of village Panchayat, where some TV programme was going on. He, thereafter, left the said place and went to the hand pump for rubbing his axe (gandasu). At that time the accused Chandrapal called Kanhaiya and took him to his house, shut him down in the room and all the accused i.e., Bhagirathi, Chandrapal, Mangal Singh and Videshi in furtherance of their common intention pressed his neck and committed his murder. Thereafter, the accused Mangal Singh and Videshi committed the murder of Kumari Brinda. After committing their murders, they kept the dead bodies of Kanhaiya and Brinda in the house upto 4/12/1994 and then took the dead bodies to Kajubadi. The accused thereafter hanged the dead bodies of both the deceased by tying the noose in their necks with the tree of cashew in the Kajubadi and attempted to give it the shape of their having committed suicide.

(3.) The Sessions Court framed the charge against the four accused i.e., Bhagirathi, Chandrapal, Mangal Singh and Videshi, for the offence under sec. 302, in the alternative under sec. 302 read with sec. 34 of IPC. Each of the accused was also separately charged for the offence under sec. 201 read with sec. 34 of IPC, as also for the offence under sec. 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989. The prosecution to bring home the charges levelled against the accused had examined 16 witnesses and also adduced documentary evidence. The First Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), after the appreciation of the evidence on record, vide the judgement and order dtd. 3/8/1998, acquitted all the accused from the charges levelled against them under sec. 3(2)(v) of the SC ST Act, however, found them guilty of the offences under sec. 302 and 201 read with sec. 34 of IPC. They all were sentenced to imprisonment for life for the offence under sec. 302 read with sec. 34 of IPC, and were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under sec. 201 read with sec. 34 of IPC.