The central legal point established in the judgment is that the act of causing death with the knowledge that it is likely to occur constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code.

This appeal is directed against judgment dated 30-5-2003 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamund in Sessions Trial No. 412/2002. By the impugned judgment, accused/appellant Milan Kumar has been convicted under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and co-accused Dhashrath Netam has been acquitted of the charges framed against him.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under:

10-12 days prior to the date of incident, the appellant and acquitted accused Dashrath Netam had come to Village Fuljhar along with snakes to earn money for livelihood. They were teaching Mantra of snake and scorpion bite. Villagers Chhalu Khairwar, Konda alias Om Prakash Gond, Komal Dhruw, Rajendra Dhruw, Adharu Dhruw, Kartik Ram Dhruw, Ghasiram and Bhuneshwar alias Makhanu had gone to the appellant and acquitted accused Dashrath to learn Mantra. The appellant and acquitted accused Dashrath had kept variety of snakes in different boxes. After three days training, on 16-8-2002, acquitted accused Dashrath gave a piece of Layee (made of paddy) to all the learners having dipped in poison of Domi Snake (Indian Cobra). All the above person had eaten a piece of Layee. After feeding a piece of Layee, acquitted accused Dashrath told to all the learners that it was necessary to ask for beg from houses, otherwise, Mantra was not to work. Therefore, all the learners reached the house of deceased Ghasiram to beg from his house along with the appellant. The appellant took a Domi snake and started teaching to catch the snake. The appellant caught the Domi snake and told deceased Ghasiram to catch the snake. Deceased Ghasiram caught the Domi snake from the bottom side i.e., its tail. At that time, the appellant rolled the Domi Snake around the neck of deceased Ghasiram. The Domi snake bit deceased Ghasiram. Thereafter, all the learners went to the houses of some other villagers for begging. At about 12-1:00 p. m., when they reached at the Dera of acquitted accused Dashrath, deceased Ghasiram became unconscious. Appellant Milan Kumar brought Jadi-buti (herb) and fed the deceased, however, the deceased remained unconscious. Thereafter, he took the deceased to the house of the deceased and absconded from there on the pretext of bringing medicine for the deceased. In the evening, at about 7:00 p.m., deceased Ghasiram died. Bhuneshwar (PW-1, brother of the deceased) lodged Dehati Nalishi (Ex. P-1) in Police Station Mahasamund where Dehati merg intimation (Ex. P-3) was recorded. Investigating Officer gave notice (Ex. P-5) to Panchas and prepared inquest (Ex. P-6) on the dead body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was sent to Civil Hospital, Mahasamund for post-mortem examination vide Ex. P-7A. Dr. N. K. Mandape (PW-8) conducted post- mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and gave report (Ex. P-7). He opined that cause of the death was coma and tissue muscular paralysis leading to cardio respiratory failure due to snake bite.

In further investigation, spot map (Ex. P-2) was prepared by Inspector L. K. Gaikwad (PW-9).

After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and acquitted accused Dashrath in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahasamund, who, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Session, Raipur, from where, it was received on transfer by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, who conducted the trial and convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above and acquitted the co-accused Dashrath of the charges framed against him.

3. Shri K. K. Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellant, argued that the evidence of prosecution witnesses are not cogent and trustworthy. The evidence of prosecution witnesses is full of contradictions. He further argued that the prosecution has not been able to prove the offence against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Co-accused Dashrath has been acquitted by the learned tr