ANAND NARANG Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment dtd. 18/5/2016 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, in Sessions Trial No.205/2015, by which, the appellant herein has been convicted for offence under Ss. 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in short, is that in the intervening night of 08/9/6/2015 at about 1:00 A.M. at Saddu, BSUP Colony, Block No.10, Room No.8, the appellant herein assaulted his second wife namely Savita Narang (now deceased) by axe, by which, she suffered grievous injuries and died; thereby the offence has been committed. Vishwanath Narang (PW-1) reported the matter to the police that the appellant has murdered his second wife at Saddu and came to his first wife at village Bhatgaon and making attempt to commit suicide. After completion of formalities, FIR was registered vide Ex.P-15 and Ex.P-16, merg intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-17 and Ex.P-18, inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-6 and dead body of deceased Savita Narang was subjected to post-mortem, which was conducted by Dr. S.K.Bagh (PW-14), who proved the post-mortem report Ex.P-13, according to which, cause of death was stated to be hemorrhage and shock due to neck injuries and death was homicidal in nature. Pursuant to memorandum statement of the appellant Ex.P-4, axe was recovered from the spot vide Ex.P-9, which was sent for chemical examination to FSL and as per the FSL report (Ex.P-34), human blood was found on the seized axe. After due investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offence to the jurisdictional criminal court and the case was ultimately committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and disposal in accordance with law, in which the appellant abjured his guilt and entered into defence stating that he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated.

(3.) In order to bring home the offence, prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 34 documents and the appellant-accused in support of his defence has not examined any witness but has exhibited the document Ex.D-1.