MUBARAK ALI Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking criminal appellate jurisdiction of this Court, the sole appellant herein has preferred this criminal appeal under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C., calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 27/2/2019, passed in Sessions Case No.48 of 2018 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Mubarak Ali), by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.), whereby he has been convicted for offence: under Sec. 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.100.00 and, in default of payment of fine, sentenced to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month and under Sec. 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 07 years with fine of Rs.100.00 and, in default of payment of fine, sentenced to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 20/2/2018, at about 14:00 hours, the accused-appellant with the intent to kill his two years' daughter, namely, Samira Khatoon (hereinafter referred to as the "deceased") drown her in a brook/canal (nala), situated beneath Takiya Mazar, within the ambit of Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG), due to which, she died and, further, in order to screen himself from legal punishment of committing murder of the deceased put the dead-body of the deceased on the cot kept in his courtyard and, thereby, said to have committed the aforesaid offence.

(3.) It is further case of the prosecution that when Mohd. Ramjan (PW-05) reported the matter to the police, merg. intimation (Ex.P/04) and FIR (Ex.P/05) were registered by the police and wheels of investigation started running, in which, summons under Sec. 175 of CrPC were sent vide Ex.P/01 and inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P/02. Spot map was also prepared vide Ex.P/04. The dead-body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Nitesh Karmendra (PW-06) and, as per PM report (Ex.P/11), it has been opined that opinion can be given after diatom test. The appellantaccused was arrested vide Ex.P/17 and his memorandum statement was recorded vide Ex.P/08. Bone of the deceased was seized vide Ex.P/07 and water from the place of incident was also seized vide Ex.P/14. The aforesaid seized articles were sent to the FSL, Raipur for the purpose of diatom test and, as per FSL reportcum-Diatom Test report (Ex.P/24) it has been opined that the water and bone are found positive for diatom test. After statements of witnesses were recorded and due investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the appellant in the competent criminal court having jurisdiction and, thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which the appellant/accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence by stating that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated.