GAYARAM AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two connected appeals arise out of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 19/8/2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Mungeli district Bilaspur in S.T. No. 49/2011 whereby and whereunder the appellants have been held guilty for commission of offence and sentenced as below :

(2.) Prosecution story, as is unfolded from the records of the case and impugned judgment is that upon receipt of information regarding assault by the appellants on one Devendra and Goverdhan, police reached at the spot in village Dindori on 17/7/2011 and Puna Ram (PW-2) who is said to have been present at the spot, informed regarding the incident and having found the dead body, which led to recording of merg intimation at the instance of PW-2 Puna Ram as also dehati nalishi (spot FIR). In the merg and spot FIR, it was recorded that there existed dispute relating to property between Bali ram and Sant Ram. Sant Ram, son of Goverdhan, had sown soya bean in the field. It was further recorded therein that there was a hue and cry that Bali Ram and his family members have opened fire and Bali Ram, his sons Rajesh, Bhupesh and Mahesh were seen dragging a person on the ground whereafter, Puna Ram came to his house and then went to the house of Gautam where Goverdhan was found lying in injured condition who stated that Bali Ram, Bhupesh, Rajesh and Mahesh have fired gun shot on him and his brother Devendra. On the similar lines, spot FIR and merg, unnumbered FIR and merg were recorded at the police station. Dead body of Devendra was sent for postmortem. Dr. R.S.Ayam PW-7 conducted post mortem examination and prepared report in Ex.P-23. Goverdhan was also examined by Dr. Vibha Sindur PW-6. Post mortem of Devendra revealed certain injuries and according to the opinion of the doctor, he died of gun shot injury on his neck because of excessive bleeding. Goverdhan was also reported having sustained gun shot injury. Investigation was carried out and charge sheet was filed against Bali Ram, Rajesh, Bhupesh, Mahesh, Gaya ram and Daya Ram. Prosecution case was that because of the property dispute at the spot, appellants and other accused opened fire and shot Goverdhan and Devendra in which incident, though Goverdhan survived, Devendra died homicidal death. Upon framing of charges, appellants abjured guilt and they were put to trial. It is relevant to note at this stage that two accused namely, Rajesh and Mahesh remained absconding and the present appellants were tried.

(3.) In order to prove its case, prosecution came out with the eyewitness account of Goverdhan PW-3 and Komal Sahu PW-11. The appellants examined one defence witness also. In their 313 Cr.P.C. statement, appellants denied having committed the offence and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case.