VIJAY MALAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal filed under Sec. 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the appellant-accused is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 20/1/2017, passed by the Sessions Judge, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No.55 of 2016, whereby appellant-accused has been convicted for offence under Sec. 302 of IPC an sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.3,000.00 and, in default of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment of 3 months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that, on 29/4/2016, in the evening, at village Aurijor Harradand within the ambit of Police Station Kunkuri, District Jashpur (C.G.), the appellant-accused has assaulted his wife by means of hands and fists as also by stick, due to which, she suffered grievous injuries on her head and died on 6/5/2016 while undergoing treatment at District Hospital Ambikapur, pursuant to which, merg intimation was given to the Police vide Ex.P/13 and, on the basis of which, First Information Report (Ex.P/16) was registered against the appellant-accused. Inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P/2. Spot map and Panchnama were prepared vide Ex.P/9 and Ex.P/5 respectively. The dead body of deceased Rajkumari was sent for postmortem examination and in the postmortem report (Ex.P/11), Dr. K.R. Tekam (PW-9) opined that the case of death seems to be cardio pulmonary arrest due to head injury and nature of death is homicidal. Thereafter, appellant-accused was arrested vide Ex.P/6 and his memorandum statement was recorded vide Ex.P/3, pursuant to which, seizure of blood stained stick was affected vide Ex.P/4. However, said blood stained stick which is said to have been recovered pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant-accused (Ex.P/3) was not subjected to FSL examination for the reasons best known to the prosecution. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded and after due investigation, the appellant-accused was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) and thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which, the appellant-accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence.

(3.) The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 21 documents, whereas the appellant-accused in support of his defence has not examined any witness, but exhibited one document.