KHEDURAM SONI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assail in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction rendered by the Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ('the IPC' in short) for committing murder of Mokshada Soni (since deceased) during the period between 13.00 hours to 17.00 hours on 4-3-2010.

(2.) Facts necessary to appreciate the prosecution case are that appellant No.1 Kheduram Soni, his brothers Mohan Soni, Beena Lal Soni and Late Shital Prasad Soni were residing in one common premises having separate portions occupied by each of them. After death of Shital Prasad Soni, his wife Mokshada Soni was occupying one part of the house whereas brother Beena Lal Soni (PW-6), being mentally disturbed, was not allotted any room and was living on the mercy of appellant Kheduram or brother Mohan. Deceased Mokshada Soni was Headmistress in the Saraswati Shishu Mandir, Komakhan. Appellant Kheduram has a cloth shop in the same town whereas Mohan has a jewelery shop. Mokshada Soni has one son and one daughter namely; Alok Kumar Soni (PW-2) and Roshni Soni (PW-3), respectively. While Roshni Soni (PW-3) resides in a different place after her marriage; Alok Kumar Soni (PW-2) has engaged himself as a Document Writer in the premises of the office of the Sub Registrar, Mahasamund.

(3.) The merg intimation (Ex.P/12) was recorded at 19.15 hours on 4-3-2010 on the information of appellant Kheduram to the effect that Aditi Soni (PW-8) informed him that the dead body of Mokshada Soni is floating in the well. Kheduram went towards the well and saw the dead body floating in the well with only blouse and petticoat over her body and one bucket was also found inside the well. Kheduram apprehended that the deceased might have fallen into the well while drawing water and nobody has witnessed the deceased falling into well otherwise efforts would have been made to save her. After receiving the information, the police went to the spot; brought out the dead body; and prepared the inquest (Ex.P/4) in the morning of 5-3-2010. The inquest could not be prepared in the evening/night of 4-3-2010 because it was getting dark and the minute inspection of the dead body may not be possible. On 5-3-2010 itself appellant Kheduram was treated to be a suspect and the bloodstains on the door frame of his house were scratched by using a wet cotton (Ex.P/5). Curtain, trouser and lungi were also recovered from the house of Kheduram vide Ex.P/6 mentioning that Kheduram is an accused even though till this time there was no evidence that he might have committed the crime. By Ex.P/7, wrist watch, cargo jeans pant and blackish brown trouser were recovered from the bed room of the appellant Kheduram. One Alpha Plus Phenyle bottle having 10 gms. of Phenyle was recovered vide Ex.P/8. From Kheduram's shop another trouser was recovered vide search memo (Ex.P/9) and seizure memo (Ex.P/10). One chocolate coloured saree allegedly belonging to the deceased was recovered at 15.15 hours on 5-3-2010 vide Ex.P/11.