ANIL KUMAR JANGDE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 26.02.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 223/2009 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 500/- u/s 302 and RI for two years with fine of Rs. 200/- under Section 201 IPC, plus default stipulations.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that deceased Santosh Dhobi and the accused/appellant were working in a security company and staying in the house of one Ambika Goswami. It is said that whenever mother of the deceased namely Kamla Bai (PW-1) tried to contact her son on his cell phone, it is the accused/appellant who used to pick it up and tell her that the deceased was at his workplace and he would let him talk with her after a while. It is alleged that when on the occasion of Holi the accused/appellant had been to the village, PW-1 asked him about the deceased but this time also he informed her that he was engaged in the work. Thereafter, on 3.3.2009 some dead-body with completely burnt face was spotted lying in the plot of one Vinod Agrawal near the village pond. At the instance of one Yogendra Solanki merg Ex. P-7 was registered on 3.3.2009 against an unknown person followed by Dehati Nalisi Ex. P-6. On that day itself FIR Ex. P-17 was also registered against unknown person for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. After drawing inquest Ex. P-9, dead-body was sent for postmortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Shiv Narayan Manjhi (PW-6) who gave his report Ex. P-12. It is said that on receiving equivocating answers from the accused mother of the deceased sensed some foul play and lodged a written report Ex. P-1 on 19.5.2009 at Police Station Simga. On 5.9.2009 also a report was made by her which was entered in the Rojnamcha Ex. P-18-A. On 15.9.2009 memorandum of the accused/appellant Ex. P-2 was recorded wherein he has stated that he committed the murder of the deceased by causing injuries to him with belt and then burnt his face. Memorandum further states that after committing murder of the deceased, accused/appellant threw the cell phone behind the house of his in-laws. Based on this memorandum, seizure of battery and broken parts of cell phone was made under Ex. P-3 whereas that of belt was made under Ex. P-4. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 302 and 201 IPC followed by framing of charge by the court below accordingly.

(3.) In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined 10 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied his guilt and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.