IMPORTANT POINT
When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Chattisgarh High Court, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant. Challenge in the appeal was to the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Raipur, in S.T. No.53/2000 who found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short the ‘Atrocities Act’) Life sentence was imposed in respect of the offence 302 IPC, however, no separate sentence was imposed for the offence relatable to Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act.

3. Prosecution version, in a nutshell, is as follows:

On 20.8.2000 at about 6 p.m. Bholaram (PW-3) lodged a report in the Police Station Basna before Station House Officer D.K. Sharma (PW-9) to the effect that today at about 3 p.m. when he along with his father was digging groundnuts in their agricultural field, the accused Daulatram and Nepal entered their agricultural field carrying axe in their hands. Damodar was also there. Accused Daulatram and Nepal started abusing in the name of the mother. They attacked his father with axe whereas accused Damodar was after him carrying sickle in his hand. He ran towards the village. On the way, Sahdev Teli met him. After reaching the village, he informed his sister Rohnibai and Parshuram. Thereafter, he along with Parshuram went to the village Devri and informed his uncle Dhoop Singh.

Receiving this report, Station House Officer, Dinesh Sharma (PW-9) registered FIR Ex.P/7 for commission of offence under Section 302, 307/34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. Intimation Ex.P/8 was also given by Bholaram. The Investigating Officer left the scene of occurrence, after giving notice Ex.P/10 to the Panchas, prepared inquest Ex.P/11 on the body of the deceased. Site plan Ex.P/9 was prepared. Based on the memorandum Ex.P/4 given by Daulat Ram, axe was recovered from him under Ex.P/1. Based on the memorandum Ex.P/5 given by Nepal, axe was recovered under Ex.P/2. Based on the memorandum Ex.P/6 given by accused Damodar, sickle was seized under Ex.P/3. The dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination under Ex.P/14 to the Primary Health Centre, Basna, where Dr. H.L. Jangde (PW-7) conducted postmortem report Ex.P/12. He opined that cause of death was haemorrhagic shock due to head injury and it was homicidal in nature.

After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused in the court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Mahasamund, who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Raipur, from where learned Special Judge received the case on transfer for trial.

The prosecution in order to establish the charge against the accused persons examined 13 witnesses. Statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied material appearing against them in the prosecution evidence and stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime. They examined one defence witness, namely, Vikram.

Learned Special Jude after considering materials placed by respective parties, convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as aforesaid. However, accused Damodar was convicted under Section 352, IPC.

4. The conviction and sentence were challenged before the High Court by both the present appellant and the accused, Nepal. The High Court found the evidence to be credible and cogent and dismissed the appeal of appellant, so far as it relates to Section 302 IPC. However, co-accused Nepal was directed to be acquitted.

5. Primary stand in support of the appeal was that the informant (PW.3) and the PW.5 are the interested witnesses and, therefore, their evidence should have been discarded.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent-State, on the other hand, supported the judgment of the High Court.

7. Merely because the eye-witnesse