HARISHANKAR VISHWAKARMA, S/O TORAN SINGH VISHWAKARMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH - DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.05.2013 passed by learned Session Judge, South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), in S.T.No.312/2011 whereby and whereunder the appellant/accused has been held guilty of commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for one month.

(2.) Prosecution story, as unfolded from the impugned judgment and the record of the case, is that an FIR in Ex.P/4 was lodged in the police station by Nindar Singh (PW/7) on 04.08.2011 at 08.10 PM wherein, it was stated that informant's sister-in-law informed regarding missing of his brother (deceased). When the informant went around in the city he finally came to know that his brother Avtar Singh has been murdered by the appellant and his dead body is lying in the house of appellant Harishankar. The police then registered a morgue in Ex.P/5 and proceeded to the scene of occurrence. Inquest over the dead body was prepared vide Ex.P/3 in the presence of the witnesses. Dead body was sent for postmortem and Dr. (Smt.) Geeta Netam (PW/14) conducted postmortem and prepared a postmortem report in Ex.P/20 an opinion in regard to homicidal death on account of injuries was written. The police then held further investigation and it is said that the memorandum of the appellant was recorded wherein, the appellant stated having committed the murder and also hided the motorcycle of the deceased by the side of the road in bushes. Further it is said that a Sabbal (long iron rod with a sharp edge used for digging purpose) was also recovered on the disclosure statement of the appellant, from the back side of courtyard of the appellant's house. Upon conclusion of usual investigation, the police filed charge sheet before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate, who in turn, committed the case for trial to the Sessions Court. On the basis of material contained in the charge sheet, learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant for commission of offence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. Appellant abjured guilt and was, therefore, put to trial. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses. The appellant was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in respect of incriminating evidence and circumstances appearing against him in the evidence led by the prosecution. Appellant denied having committed the offence and stated that he has not committed the murder and he returned house from his work after arrival of his parents. He also denied other incriminating circumstance and has stated that the place of incident is outside of his house and that the spot map was prepared without any notice.

(3.) The learned trial Court, however, relying upon the evidence led by the prosecution particularly taking into consideration that the deceased had died homicidal death upon sustaining injuries, his dead body was found in the house of the appellant and his parents and that the motorcycle of the deceased as also the weapon alleged to be used in the commission of offence was recovered at the instance of the appellant and further that there was a motive held him guilty for commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced as described above.