KALI RAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this criminal appeal, the accused/appellants have challenged the legality and propriety of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.3.2006 passed by the Special Judge {Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989}, Durg in Special Case No.34/05 by which appellant No.1 has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and sentenced to undergo RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and RI for 5 years, with usual default clauses, respectively. Whereas, accused/appellant No.2 has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo RI for 3 months.

(2.) In the present case name of deceased is Baratu.

(3.) Case of the prosecution is that on 14.3.2005 at about 9 in the night, Baratu (since deceased) entered the house of appellants and demanded liquor from them. Some dispute between the daughter-in-law of appellant No.1 and the deceased cropped up and in the course of quarrel, accused/appellant strangulated the deceased with lungi of deceased and threw the dead body in a nearby ditch. However, fearing that they may be arrested in connection with the murder of deceased, they picked up the body of deceased and threw the same in the brook. Three days after the incident, body of the deceased was recovered from the brook and after due identification, on 17.3.2005 at 9.05 a.m. merg intimation (Ex.P-18) was recorded at the instance of Dhanwar, brother of deceased. Inquest (ExP-4) was prepared over the body of deceased. FIR (Ex.P-20) was registered under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC against unknown persons. Body was sent for post-mortem examination which was conducted by Dr. R.S. Bhardwaj (PW-11) vide Ex.P-14 and he did not notice any injury or ligature mark around neck as the body was putrefied and skin partially rubbed. According to post-mortem report, the cause of death could be asphyxia due to strangulation and nature of death was homicidal. Duration of death could be 48 to 72 hrs before the post-mortem examination. In pursuance of disclosure statement (Ex.P-10) made by accused/appellant No.1, lungi of the deceased was recovered vide seizure memo of Ex.P-7. Seized lungi was sent for chemical analysis to the FSL, however, no blood could be detected on it. Statements of witnesses under Section 161 CrPC were recorded.