ROHIT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.1.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in Sessions Trial No.13/2006, whereby & whereunder learned Additional Sessions Judge while acquitting co-accused Murari and Suresh and after holding appellant Rohit guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 120- B, 302 and 148 of the I.P.C. and appellants Nag Singh, Manoj Chhagan, Nirmal and Punitram guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302/34 and 148 of the I.P.C. sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.100/-, imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.100/- and R.I for one year and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for fifteen days on each default. The Trial Court has also convicted appellants Rohit and Nag Singh under Sections 25 (1) (b) and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for three years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for fifteen days.

(2.) Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being any iota of evidence, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality.

(3.) As per case of the prosecution, on account of previous enmity of Bhalaram Dev with appellant Rohit, appellant Rohit entered into illegal conspiracy with other co-accused persons and obtained firearm from appellant Nag Singh. On the fateful day of 12.8.2005 at about 10 p.m. while Bhalaram Dev (since deceased) and his wife Dukalo Bai (PW-5) were present in their temporary hut situated at bank of Umarpal river, four persons came to their temporary hut, they were having firearms i.e., bharmar guns, they asked for food- grain, while Bhalaram was going inside his hut for bringing food-grain two persons shot fire upon him and caused serious injury, thereafter they fled from the spot. At the time of incident with a view to confuse the persons and investigation they used the word that they are jungle wale i.e. symbol of nuxli. They also affixed one nuxli pamphlet Ex.P/7K. Dukalo Bai (PW-5), wife of deceased Bhalaram immediately went towards village and informed to her sons Shyam Singh (PW-1) and Santram (PW-11), they immediately rushed to the spot, at that time, Bhalaram was alive, Shyam Singh (PW-1) immediately went to the Police Station and lodged the F.I.R. vide Ex.P/1 against two unknown persons. Merg was also recorded vide Ex.P/2. When Santram (PW-11) was present with injured Bhalaram on the spot and no other persons were present, then injured Bhalaram made dying declaration that four persons had come to the place of incident and out of four Rohit and Punit were present. He was under threat and after eleven days of incident he narrated the incident relating to factum of dying declaration to Police vide Ex.D/5. After summoning the witnesses vide Ex.P/5, inquest over dead body of Bhalaram was prepared vide Ex.P/6. Investigating officer prepared spot map vide Ex.P/3. Alleged nuxli pamphlet Ex.P/7K was seized from the spot along with one nail vide Ex.P/7. Cartridge of firearm and piece of cloth containing smell of explosive were seized from the spot vide Ex.P/11. Bloodstained and plain soil were recovered from the spot vide Ex.P/12. Nuxli pamphlet Ex.P/34 was seized from the spot vide Ex.P/13. Dead body was sent for autopsy and death was opined as a result of gun shot injury. Sealed clothes of the deceased were seized vide Ex.P/10. During the course of investigation, appellant Rohit was taken into custody, he made disclosure statement of gun, torch and cell vide Ex.P/14 and cell and torch were recovered at the instance of appellant Rohit vide Ex.P/15. Alleged gun was recovered from appellant Nag Sai vide Ex.P/16. Another gun was recovered from appellant Rohit vide Ex.P/17.