SUNDAR RAM RATHIYA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal preferred by the appellants under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment dtd. 22/10/2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Raigarh, in Sessions Trial No.115/2013, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 and Sec. 201 read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under :

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in short, is that in the intervening night of 9/3/2013 and 10/3/2013 and from 9:30 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. at village Barbhouna P.S. Chhal, District Raigarh, the appellants assaulted the deceased Chhabiram Rathiya by axe and thereby committed his murder and thereafter, they poured kerosene oil on his body and then burnt dead body; thereby, the aforesaid offence has been committed.

(3.) It is the further case of the prosecution that the appellant No.1 Sundar Ram Rathiya had kept the legally wedded wife of the deceased Chhabiram namely Jaharo Bai as prior to 3-4 days of the date of incident, Jaharo Bai left the company of Sundar Ram (A-1) which he suspected to have been abducted by deceased on account of which, the appellants in furtherance of common intention caused the death of deceased by spade and burnt the dead body by pouring kerosene oil and thereby, they committed the offence. Rampyari Rathiya (PW-1), Buwa of the deceased made missing report to the Police Station Chhal, pursuant to which the dead body of the deceased was traced in Barbhauna forest canal. Dehati Merg Intimation Ex. P-12 and Ex.P-13 was registered and panchanama was prepared by Ex.P-2 and on the recommendation of the panchas, the dead body was sent for post-mortem vide Ex.P-14 and the post-mortem was conducted by Dr. S.S.Bhagat (PW-4) who proved the post-mortem report by Ex.P-24. According to the post-mortem report, the cause of death was excessive bleeding and death was homicidal in nature. Pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant No.1, the bloodstained axe was seized and also spade was seized vide Ex.P-7 and clothes were seized vide Ex.P-8 and all were sent to FSL. The shirt was also seized by Exs.P-10 and P-11, which were also sent to FSL, but FSL report was not brought on record. After usual investigation, the appellants were charge- sheeted for the aforesaid offences, which was ultimately committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law, in which the accused persons abjured their guilt and entered into defence and stating that they have not committed any offence.