DHARAMPAL PATEL Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 05th December, 2002 passed by the Special Judge and Additional Session Judge, Durg in Special Case No.77/2002. By the impugned judgment, appellant Dharampal Patel has been convicted under Sections 302, 307 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year, rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and rigorous imprisonment for 7 years, respectively.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are as under: Rajesh Meshram (PW-9), his wife Archana Meshram (deceased) and their daughter Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW-6), aged about 6 years, were residing together in a house. On 25.02.2002, at about 1.30 p.m., when the deceased and her daughter Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW-6) were inside their house, the appellant came there from backside of the house and tried to open the Almirah kept in a room inside the house. When the deceased saw the appellant, he assaulted her and her daughter Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW- 6) with the Knife and thereafter fled through roof. The deceased succumbed to the injuries. When Rajesh Meshram (PW-9) came to the house, he found that the house was closed from inside. He knocked the door but it was not opened. Then, he asked some boy of his neighbourhood to go inside the house from its roof and open the door. The boy entered the house and opened the door. Rajesh Meshram (PW-9) entered the house and found his wife Archana Meshram lying dead on the cot and his daughter in injured condition. He lodged First Information Report (Ex.P-11) and Merg Intimation (Ex.P- 10) was also recorded. The investigating officer reached the place of occurrence, gave notice (Ex.P-12) to Panchas and prepared inquest (Ex.P-13) on dead body of the deceased. Dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination to Government Hospital, Durg vide Ex.P-19. Post mortem examination was conducted by Dr. J.P. Meshram (PW-1), who gave his report (Ex.P-1), in which he found (i) incised wound of 7cmsx3cmsxbone deep on left wrist, (ii) incised wound 5cmsx2cms just below injury No.1, (iii) abrasion of 5cmsx2cms on right cheek, (iv) incised wound of 3cmsx2 cmsxbone deep just behind right ear, also found the carotid artery punctured and (v) incised wound of 5cmsx2cmsxbone deep on the right parietal region. The doctor opined that cause of death was shock and haemorrhage as a result of excessive blood loss. Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW-6) was also sent for medical examination. Dr. A.K. Mishra (PW-13) examined her and gave his report Ex.P-25. He found (i) an incised wound of 4cmsx1cmxbone deep on her right parietal bone, (ii) a superficial incised wound of 1cmx0.25cm on her right scapular region, (iii) a transverse incised wound of 1cmx0.25cmx0.25cm on her left scapular region and (iv) a superficial abrasion of +cmx+cm on her back. He found that the injuries No.(i) to (iii) were caused by a hard and sharp weapon. Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW-6) was admitted in surgical ward of the hospital for further treatment.

(3.) Shri Y.C. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution examined only Ku. Nidhi Meshram (PW-6) as eye/injured witness and at the time of her examination, she was only 6 years old. She was a child witness. Her evidence is not clinching and cogent. Therefore, the conviction based on her evidence is unsustainable.