LAWS(CHH)-2016-2-68

VIVEK PANDA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On February 10, 2016
Vivek Panda Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.09.2012 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in S.T. No.8/2012 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 307 and 324 IPC & sentencing him to undergo R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and R.I. three years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that complainant/victim Reshma Panda (PW/2) is wife of the accused/appellant, whereas the other victim Chameli Nande (PW/3) is his mother-in-law. It is said that the family dispute is pending between the accused/appellant and his wife Reshma Panda, and case under Section 498-A has also been registered against the accused/appellant. The accused/appellant was pressurizing his wife to compromise the said matter and when the complainant Reshma Panda refused to succumb to his pressure, it is alleged that on 27.11.2011 when Reshma Panda (PW/2) and Chameli Nande (PW/3) were going to answer the call of nature at about 6:00 pm, the accused/appellant who had hidden himself nearby the place, came there and caused injuries to them by a soldering machine as a result of which both of them sustained injuries. Thereafter, victims were taken to the hospital where Reshma Panda (PW/2) and Chameli Nande (PW/3) were medically examined vide Ex.P/1 and Ex.P/6 respectively. Reshma Panda (PW/2) lodged the FIR (Ex.P/3) against the accused/appellant, on the basis of which, offence under Sections 307 and 324 IPC was registered against him. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellant under Section 307 IPC for attempting to murder of Chameli Nande (PW/3) and Section 324 IPC for causing injury to Reshma Panda (PW/2) and charges were also framed accordingly.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 04 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. He has also examined two defence witnesses to establish his plea that injuries suffered by victims were due to falling and the accused/appellant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question.