BALI RAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Judgment on Board by Pritinker Diwaker, J 11/04/2017 As these two appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 04.08.2007 rendered by Sessions Judge, Janjgir Champa in Sessions Trial No. 58/2006 convicting the accused/appellants under Sections 302/34, 323/34 and 506 (Part-II) IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 3000/- under Section 302, pay fine of Rs. 1000/- u/s 323 and undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year u/s 506 (Part-II) IPC, plus default stipulations, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) As per the case of the prosecution, on 19.2.2006 at about 7 PM four persons from the deceased group namely Firangi, Firatram, Asharam and Dharmalal while returning from the Nursery started abusing each other, but the accused/appellants mistook it as if the abuses were aimed at them, they got furious and started assaulting Dharamlal (deceased) and Asharam (PW-

(3.) ) with club. At 11 PM FIR (Ex.P-26) was registered at the instance of Dharamlal for the offences under Sections 294, 506-B, 323, 34 IPC and thereafter on 20.2.2006 he was medically examined by Dr. K.D. Singh (PW- 5) who gave his report Ex. P-6. Injured Asharam (PW-3) was also medically examined by the same doctor vide report Ex. P-7. However, Dharamlal succumbed to the injuries on 28.2.2008 while taking treatment in the hospital. On the basis of information received from the hospital, merg Ex.P-15 was registered, inquest was conducted and the body was subjected to postmortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Ashutosh Tiwari (PW- 16) who gave his report Ex. P-16-A. Court below framed the charge against the accused/appellants under Sections 294, 506-B, 307/34 and 302/34. 3. In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined 16 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they have denied their guilt and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.