JAIRAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment and order dtd. 23/3/2013, by which the appellant herein has been convicted under Ss. 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.2,000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for six months and rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for four months, respectively.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 4/9/2010 at 6.15 p.m., at Village Regda Malidipa Tikra, Police Station Punjipathra, Distt. Raigarh, the appellant herein caused murder of Jitendra Sao by iron rod and in order to screen himself from the said offence, threw the dead body into the shrubs nearby and thereby committed the offence. Further case of the prosecution is that two days prior to the date of offence, the appellant had seen the father of the deceased - Kuldhar (PW-1) with his mother in compromising position and in one marriage party, the deceased had slapped the appellant pursuant to which the appellant was unhappy and aggrieved and to take revenge of that, on 4/9/2010 at 6.00 p.m., when the deceased came near Jogi Dabri, after brief altercation on account of earlier dispute, the appellant assaulted the deceased by iron rod and murdered him and thereafter, thrown the dead body into the shrubs / nala nearby and sold his mobile phone to one Rahmatullah for a cash consideration of Rs.1,500.00. When the deceased did not reach home, missing report was lodged vide roznamcha sanha Ex.P-22 by Kuldhar (PW-1) - father of the deceased and then uncle of the deceased Rupdhar Sao (PW-2) requested the accused / appellant, who is a baiga, to enquire the whereabouts of the deceased, then the accused asked for coconut, agarbatti and liquor and thereafter, after performing puja, the appellant informed about the place where the dead body was lying as well as the cycle and consequently, from the place as told by the appellant, dead body and cycle were seized by the police vide Ex.P-3 and thereafter, memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded vide Ex.P-5 pursuant to which iron rod was also recovered vide Ex.P-6 and it was sent for chemical examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory, but no FSL report has been brought on record. Pursuant to the recommendation of panchas, dead body was sent for postmortem which was conducted by Dr. Sunil Ratre (PW-17) vide postmortem report Ex.P-12 in which cause of death was stated to be due to haemorrhagic shock and homicidal in nature.

(3.) Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Sec. 161 of the CrPC. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant before the jurisdictional criminal court and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial from where the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh received the case on transfer for trial and for hearing and disposal in accordance with law.