Back
2014 Supreme(Chh) 181
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
YATINDRA SINGH, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Office Reference
Vs.
Govind Chandra & others
Criminal Reference No.2 of 2013
Criminal Appeal No.374 of 2013
Decided on: 14/05/2014
Advocate Appeared
Smt. Fouzia Mirza, counsel for the appellants.
Shri DK Gwalare, Govt. Advocate for the State.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 366,367 and 391 – Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 302 or 302/34 - Indian Explosive Act, 1884 - Section 9B - Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Section 4 and 5 - Evidence Act - Section 65B(2) - Arms Act - Section 27 (3) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act, 1984 – Section 69(I) - Criminal Appeal has been preferred by appellants , challenging their conviction and sentence imposed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, as mentioned - Since criminal reference and criminal appeal arise out of same impugned judgment, they are being decided by this common judgment - Appellants have been convicted for committing murders of deceased by causing explosion by means of explosive substance - While deceased died on their way to hospital on date of the incident itself, deceased died in course of treatment - (Ex.-P/1) was lodged by PW-1 on date of incident to effect that in morning he had gone to collect Mahua flowers - At he was coming back from agricultural field - When he reached village colony, informed that explosion has taken place in house of informant’s nephew and fire has broken out in house - Informant went to house and saw that villagers were dousing fire his wife and have sustained grievous burn injuries - When they were taken to hospital, wife died on way, have been referred to and taken to CIMS – Held, Criminal Reference No.2/2013 is answered in negative and court dispose of criminal reference by not confirming death sentence - Criminal appeal No.374/2013 preferred by appellants is partly allowed in respect of appellants - Death sentences imposed upon them under Sections 302/34 IPC (3 counts), 120B IPC & 27 (3) of Arms Act are set aside and instead, they are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life - Conviction and sentence imposed upon them under Sections 9B of Indian Explosive Act, 1884 and Sections 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 are hereby maintained - Appeal in respect of appellant is allowed - Conviction and sentence imposed upon him as mentioned in of judgment are set aside - He is acquitted of all charges - He be released forthwith, unless required to be detained in any other case, on his furnishing a personal bond in sum with one surety to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court - His bond shall remain in operation for a period of 6 months from today in view of provisions contained under Section 437-A of CrPC- He shall appear before the higher Court, as and when directed – Order accordingly.
Per Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
1. This is a reference under section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for confirmation of death sentence as the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar in Sessions Trial No. 84/2011 vide its judgment dated 27.02.2013 has convicted and sentenced the accused/ appellants as under:-
Under Section 9B of the Indian Explosive Act, 1884
Under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908
Under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908
RI for 2 years each and fine of Rs.500/-with usual default stipulation
RI for 3 years each and fine of Rs.500/-with usual default stipulation
RI for 3 years each and fine of Rs.500/-with usual default stipulation
2. Criminal Appeal No.374/2013 has been preferred by appellants Govind Chandra, Omprakash Chandra & Ganesh Chandra challenging their conviction and sentence imposed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur as mentioned above. Since the criminal reference and criminal appeal arise out of same impugned judgment, they are being decided by this common judgment.
3. The appellants have been convicted for committing murders of deceased Tikaram Chandra, Mithila & Fagulal Chandra by causing explosion by means of explosive substance at about 6.30 am on 19.4.2010. While deceased Mithila and Fagulal Chandra died on their way to the hospital on the date of the incident itself, deceased Tikaram Chandra died in course of treatment on 21.4.2010.
4. Merg intimation (Ex.-P/1) was lodged by PW-1 Buddheshwar Chandra at 8.30 am on the date of the incident to the effect that in the morning he had gone to collect Mahua flowers. At 6.45 am he was coming back from the agricultural field. When he reached the village colony, Baldev Chandra informed that explosion has taken place in the house of the informant’s nephew and fire has broken out in the house. The informant went to the house of Tikaram Chandra and saw that the villagers were dousing the fire and Tikaram, his wife Mithila and Fagulal have sustained grievous burn injuries. When they were taken to the hospital, Mithila died on way, and Tikaram & Fagulal have been referred to and taken to CIMS, Bilaspur.
5. Merg intimation concerning the death of Tikaram was lodged vide Ex.-P/13 & P/14. Merg intimation concerning the death of Fagulal was lodged by Surit Ram (PW-2) vide Ex.-P/42 at 10.25 am on 19.4.2010.
6. Dead body inquest of deceased Tikaram was conducted vide Ex.-P/16 whereas dead body inquest of deceased Mithila was conducted vide Ex.-P/20. The dead body inquest of deceased Fagulal was conducted vide Ex.-P/21. The postmortem on the dead body of deceased Mithila was conducted on 19.4.2010 by Dr. KK Gandharwa and postmortem report (Ex.-P/6) was submitted opining that the death is caused due to extensive burn 98%. The postmortem on the dead body of deceased Fagulal was conduced by Dr. KK Gandharva and the postmortem report (Ex.-P/7) was submitted opining that the death is caused due to extensive burn injuries 95%. The postmortem on the dead body of deceased Tikaram was conducted by PW-18 Dr. A. Tiwari and the postmortem report (Ex.-P/17) was submitted opining that the death is on account of cardio respiratory failure due to shock as a result of multiple injuries.
7. After completing merg enquiry, the FIR was registered on 27.4.2010 by the Police Inspector LC Mohale against unknown persons stating that during enquiry of merg intimation, he recorded statements of the witnesses, conducted dead body inquest and obtained postmortem reports, from which the deaths of the deceased persons were found to have occurred on account of extensive burn injuries. The witnesses informed the police that near about 4 pm on 18.4.2010 2 unknown persons came to the house of Tikaram Chandra and delivered one suitcase kept in plastic bag saying that it contains parts of tubewell and in the next morning, explosion has taken place.
8. During investigation, the appellants were taken into custody. Terricot shirt
