MAYARAM & ORS. Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against judgment dated 02 -03 -2007 passed by Sessions Judge, Mahasamund in Sessions Trial No. 29/2006. By the impugned judgment, accused persons/appellants Mayaram, Bisaru @ Chandu and Purushottam have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under:

(2.) SHRI Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellants, has argued that there is no independent eye -witness. Kaliram (PW -1) is father of the deceased and Ku. Leena Sahu (PW -3) is daughter of the deceased. They are relatives and highly interested witnesses. Evidence of Puran Bandhe (PW -6) is not reliable. His presence at the place of occurrence is suspicious. He further argued that there was an old enmity between Kaliram (P W -1) and the appellants. On account of that enmity, the appellants have been falsely implicated by Kaliram (PW -1) and Ku. Leena Sahu (PW -3), therefore, their evidence are not acceptable. The prosecution did not adduce any cogent and reliable evidence. Therefore, the conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge is not sustainable and the appellants deserve to be acquitted.

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of Sessions Trial No. 29/2006. The conviction of the appellants under Section 302 /34 IPC is based on the evidence of Kaliram (PW -1), Ku. Leena Sahu (PW -3) and Puran Bandhe (PW -6).