SANJU @ SANJAY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24.9.2002 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No.227 of 2001 convicting and sentencing each of the Appellants as under:

(2.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 15.4.2001 at about 10:30 p.m., Sangita Sahu (PW1), daughter of deceased Ramesh Sahu lodged First Information Report (Ex.P1) at Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur to the effect that at about 10:00 O'clock of the same night, when her mother was at home and her father was taking out his scooter to go somewhere, Appellant No.1, Sanju and his 4-5 companions entered their house. All of them caused damage to the scooter and pulled her father out of home and assaulted him with lathi and knife. When Chandrika (PW4), wife of Ramesh Sahu tried to intervene, one of the assailants assaulted her on her left leg with a knife. The incident was witnessed by neighbours also. Thereafter, injured Ramesh Sahu was taken to hospital by Lokesh Sahu, cousin of Sangita Sahu and Ganesh Sahu, elder brother of Ramesh Sahu. The First Information Report was registered for offence punishable under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code against Appellant No.1, Sanju and his 4-5 companions. Injured Ramesh Sahu was examined at the hospital by Dr. S.S. Bhatia (PW3). Dr. Bhatia found 4 injuries on the body of Ramesh Sahu. Out of them, 3 injuries were contusions and 1 injury was incised wound. He was admitted in surgical ward of the hospital. X-ray of the abdomen and skull was advised by the doctor. His report is Ex.P4. The doctor also informed the matter to the police vide Ex.P3. On 16.4.2001, statements of Sangita (PW1), Chandrika (PW4) and other witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In her statements (Ex.D1 and D2) under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Sangita and Chandrika mentioned the names of all the assailants. Injured Ramesh Sahu remained hospitalised for 2 days and on 17.4.2001, he died in the hospital. Morgue intimation (Ex.P27) was recorded on the basis of information received from the hospital vide Ex.P26. Inquest (Ex.P2) was recorded. Spotmap (Ex.P13) was prepared. Post mortem examination of the dead body of Ramesh Sahu was conducted by Dr. S.S. Bhatia (PW3). Post mortem examination report is Ex.P7. On examination, he found 1 additional injury (lacerated wound) on right ring finger of the deceased. He also found fracture on the base of the skull. He opined that injuries No.1, 2, 3 and 5 were caused by hard and blunt object and injury No.4 was caused by hard and sharp object. He also opined that the deceased died of shock and coma as a result of injuries No.1, 2 and 3 and the nature of death was homicidal. During investigation, the police recorded memorandum statement (Ex.P15) of Appellant Sanju and on the basis of his memorandum, seized a gupti from him vide Ex.P16. The police also recorded memorandum statement (Ex.P17) of Appellant Ramayan and on the basis of his memorandum, seized a lathi from him vide Ex.P18. Memorandum statement (Ex.P19) of Appellant Narayan was recorded and on the basis of his memorandum, 1 lathi was seized from him vide Ex.P20. Memorandum statement (Ex.P21) of Appellant Raju was also recorded and on the basis of his memorandum, 1 lathi was seized from him vide Ex.P22. Blood stained clothes of Appellant Sanju were seized from him vide Ex.P24. Blood stained clothes of Appellant Ramayan were seized from him vide Ex.P25. All the seized articles were examined by Dr. S.S. Bhatia (PW3). All the seized articles were also sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory vide Ex.P29 for chemical examination. FSL report is Ex.P34. The articles were also sent for serological examination. Report of the Serologist is Ex.P35. Stains of "B" blood group were found on the clothes of the deceased. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellants for offence punishable under Sections 302, 450, 323, 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Charges were framed against them under Section 302 in the alternative under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 323 in the alternative under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) To rope in the Appellants, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Statements of the Appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them, pleaded innocence and false implication. 1 witness has been examined in defence of the Appellants.