MAMTA YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 28/7/2012 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in S.T. No.218/2011 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sec. 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') and sentenced her to undergo Life Imprisonment and R.I. for four years respectively with usual default stipulations.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that when one Lakhan Yadav working in the agricultural field (Mahisasur Khar) situated at village Limtara, he saw the fingers of hand coming out from surface of field on which he informed the same to the land owner Kunjlal Dewangan (PW-1). Subsequently, after inspection dead body was exhumed and the same was found to be of a lady. An application was given to the S.D.M. Chavani. Thereafter, site map (Nazari Naksha) was prepared and the dead body was sent for postmortem. The FIR (Ex.P-12) was registered for offence under Ss. 302 and 201 of the IPC. On postmortem, the death was found to be homicidal in nature. On 15/3/2011 Sarpanch of village namely; Jhalaram Madhariya (PW-2) along with other panchas made an enquiry from the accused and her husband Suresh Yadav Oriya, wherein she admitted that she had killed her elder sister Chhaiyya (since deceased) two months prior to the date of recovery of dead-body. Thereafter, the Sarpanch had sent a communication dtd. 16/3/2011 (Ex.P-6) to the City Superintendent of Police. Subsequently, on 17/3/2011, on the basis of memorandum (Ex. P-7), the stone was recovered as article 'F', vide seizure memo (Ex. P-8). The said article i.e. stone when was sent for FSL, blood was found on it. On the basis of memorandum, seizure and extra judicial confession made by the accused, the charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) During trial the appellant/accused abjured her guilt and stated that she is not familiar with the language and her thumb impression was obtained on papers to record the confession. The prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses and 24 documents. Upon appreciation of evidence, the trial Court came to a finding that the appellant has committed the offence and convicted and sentenced her as mentioned above. Thus, this appeal.