LAWS(CHH)-2018-8-108

ARUN KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On August 27, 2018
ARUN KUMAR VERMA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.12.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 22/2011 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302/34 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 100/-, plus default stipulation.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in short is that accused and the deceased were on inimical terms prior to the date of incident. On 3.11.2010 at about 6 PM the accused/appellant and the juvenile accused namely Shekhar alias Chunmun had assaulted Shiv Kumar with club and stone. Injured was immediately taken to Ganiyari hospital on 4.11.2010 from where he was shifted to CIIMS Bilaspur. However, in CIIMS the victim succumbed to the injuries on the same night. After receiving information from CIIMS, un-numbered merg (Ex.P16) was recorded on 5.11.2010 day at 8.15 AM followed by unnumbered FIR Ex.P-18 which was recorded at 5.20 PM on the same day by Mahesh Verma (PW-15) against the accused/appellant herein, juvenile accused Shekhar alias Chunmun and others. After drawing inquest Ex. P-8, the deadbody was sent for postmortem examination which was conducted by Dr. A.K. Kaushik (PW-9) who gave his report Ex. P-10. Thereafter, numbered FIR (Ex. P-19) and numbered merg (Ex.P-20) came to be registered against them for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. On the memorandum of the accused/appellant (Ex.P-14), a club was seized under Ex. P-12 but there is no FSL report on record. Court below framed the charge against the accused/appellant and the juvenile accused under Section 302/34 IPC.

(3.) In order to prove the complicity of the accused/appellant in the crime in question, the prosecution has examined 19 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied his guilt and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.