SOMARURAM BAGHEL Vs. STATE OF C G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7.1.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 3/2011 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 300/- plus default stipulation.

(2.) In the present case, name of the deceased is Aasmati, wife of the appellant. As per prosecution case, the appellant was residing with his wife Aasmati and on 1.11.2010 at about 8.30 am the appellant demanded silver anklet from his wife as he wanted to purchase liquor and when she refused he gave two axe blows on her head. Information was given to PW-1 Jhitru, son of the appellant, who immediately returned to his house and found Aasmati lying on the floor with injury on her head and the appellant was sitting there. On being asked, the appellant confessed before him to have caused injuries to her. Aasmati succumbed to her injuries in the house itself at about 3 pm. FIR (Ex.P/2) was lodged on 1.11.2010 at 7.30 pm by PW-1 Jhitru against the appellant under Section 302 of IPC and immediately thereafter merg intimation was also recorded vide Ex.P/1 at the instance of PW-1. After conducting inquest over the dead body on 2.11.2010 vide Ex.P/9, it was sent for postmortem which was conducted on the same day by PW-5 Dr. Smt. Rita Gedam vide Ex.P/11 and she noticed incised wound over left upper temporal region of skull and incised wound over occipital region, both caused by sharp and heavy object. In her opinion, the cause of death was internal and hemorrhagic shock due to head injury and that the death was homicidal in nature. On 2.1.2011 memorandum of the appellant was recorded vide Ex.P/5 and in pursuance thereof one axe stained with blood was seized vide Ex.P/6. However, there is no FSL report on record. According to the prosecution case, the appellant confessed his guilt before PW-1 Jhitru, PW-3 Bagga Ram Baghel, PW-4 Hadmo Ram Mandavi and PW-6 Chherka Baghel. While framing charge, the trial Court framed charge under Section 302 of IPC against the appellant.

(3.) In order to prove the complicity of the accused/appellant in the crime in question, the prosecution has examined 9 witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied his guilt and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.