IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, N.K. CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Amrit Lal Sahu S/o Late Shivdayal Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1139 of 2014
Decided On : 14-08-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) – Offence of Murder – Appeal against Conviction - Held, Conduct of appellant that immediately after incident, he went missing raises suspicion against appellant - Though in reply given by him to queries made he states that he was away from his house as he was a labourer and had gone for searching labour work and because of animosity, (PW-9) had falsely deposed against him - It is an admitted fact that said witness (PW-9) is a neighbour of appellant and deceased - As such, there is nothing unusual that he would have been present there as his house is about 10-20 meters from his house - Allegation of being an interested witness has no basis – Court are of considered opinion that prosecution has been been successful in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and learned trial Court has not committed any legal or factual error in arriving at finding with regard to the guilt of appellant/convict - Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
RAMESH SINHA, J.
1. This criminal appeal filed by the appellant-accused under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Cr.P.C.) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.09.2014, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Korba, in Sessions Trial No. 45/2013, whereby the appellant-accused has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the I.P.C.) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 6 months additional rigorous imprisonment.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that 8-9 years prior to the date of incident, the appellant had married with the deceased namely Nanbai and were residing at Sanjay Nagar, Korba. On the date of incident i.e. 22.02.2013, both of them had an altercation as the appellant used to doubt the character of his wife and threatened her that he would burn her alive. Being scared, the deceased went in her room and lied on the cot. At that time, the appellant came and poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. The deceased came out of the room screaming for help and fell on the ground.
3. The matter was reported to the police upon which the police reached the place of incident and took the injured Nanbai to the Hospital. Dehati Nalishi (Exhibit P/16) was recorded by Police Sub Inspector, Arun Kumar Sahu bearing Crime No. 0/2013 under Section 307 IPC on 22.02.2013 at 02:00 p.m. at the place of incident i.e. house of the accused and the deceased at Sanjay Nagar, Korba. The deceased informed the IO that she was residing with the accused for the last 8-9 years as his wife and she does the labour work. On the date of incident, at about 1:00 p.m., the accused started quarrelling with the deceased on some old dispute and stated that today he will not spare her and would kill her. She got scared and went to her room and lied on the cot. At that time, the accused came ad poured kerosene on her and burnt her with a match stick. When she screamed for help and went outside the house, at that time, Rizwan and other people of the area came and they saw that her husband i.e. the accused had tried to kill her.
4. Thereafter, on the basis of Dehati Nalishi (Exhibit P/16), Arun Kumar Sahu who is the Investigating Officer (for short, the I.O.) registered the FIR bearing Crime No. 140/2013 on the same day at 20:00 hours under Section 307 of the IPC.
5. The deceased was taken to the Indira Gandhi District Hospital, Korba, where she was admitted and during the course of treatment, she succumbed to the burn injuries sustained by her on the same day i.e. 22.02.2013 at 9:35 pm. On the basis of information (Exhibit P/12) given by Dr. Ghanshyam Diwan (PW/7), merg intimation (Exhibit P/18) was recorded by the I.O. on 23.02.2023 at 6:30 a.m. The body was sent for postmortem and the postmortem was conducted by Dr. O.S. Kanwar (PW/8) who prepared the postmortem report (Exhibit P/13).
6. After investigating the matter, the police submitted the police report alongwith charge-sheet against the Accused under section 302 IPC before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba who in turn committed the case to the Session Court for trial and was registered as Sessions Trial No. 45/2013
7. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge on 16.07.2013 charging the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.
8. Amongst others, the prosecution has filed the following documents in support of its case:
(ii) Duty Certificate (Exhibit P/2)
(iii) Nazri Naksha (Exhibit P/3)
(iv) Summons under Section 175 of Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/4A and P/4)
(v) Inquest report (Exhibit P/5)
(vi) Statement of Jamila Bai (Exhibit P/6)
(vii) Statement of Muskan (Exhibit P/7)
(viii) Property seizure memo (Exhibit P/8)
(ix) Panchnama (Exhibit P/9)
(x) Statement of Ali Khan (Exhibit P/10)
(xi) Sta
Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and Another vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Munnu Raja and Another vs. State of M.P. (1976) 3 SCC 104
Ramawati Devi vs. State of Bihar
Smt. Paniben vs. State of Gujarat
The dying declaration of the deceased, supported by medical evidence and circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to establish guilt under Section 302 of IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, including the dying declaration, medical evidence, and witness statements, to establish the guilt of the a....
A dying declaration must be certified by a medical professional regarding the declarant's mental fitness; failure to do so undermines its reliability as evidence in a murder conviction.
A dying declaration, if made in a fit mental state and corroborated by witnesses, can be sufficient for conviction without the need for further corroboration, emphasizing the sanctity of such stateme....
Dying declarations can constitute sole evidence for conviction if found voluntary and truthful; the burden of proof for alibi rests solely with the appellant.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if they are consistent and credible; however, inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to reasonable doubt and acquitt....
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as a sole basis for conviction, as established by various Supreme Court cases.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if corroborated by reliable evidence, and the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.