The court ruled that the appellant's actions, prompted by provocation and lack of intent to kill, warranted a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC.

JUDGMENT :

RAJANI DUBEY, J.

1. Challenge in this appeal is the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.11.2019 passed by 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in ST No. 65/2018, whereby the appellant stands convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default thereof to suffer additional RI for one month.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 2.6.2018 Chhatrapal came home after consuming liquor and started abusing and quarreling with the appellant. Being enraged, the appellant assaulted with an axe on his head, neck and back as a result of which he died. After investigation, the police filed charge sheet under Section 302 of IPC against the appellant followed by framing of charge accordingly by learned trial court which was abjured by her and she prayed for trial.

3. In order to substantiate its case the prosecution examined 16 witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein she denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against her in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. No witness was examined by her in her defence.

4. After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the material available on record. No independent witness has supported the prosecution case. In this case, the prosecution witnesses namely PW-3 Motilal, PW-10 Smt. Jamuna Sarthi and PW-13 Poonam Devi have turned hostile. Therefore, learned trial court was not justified in recording her conviction u/s 302 of IPC.

Alternatively, she submits that in fact, on the date of incident the deceased in a drunken condition was abusing and quarreling with the appellant and as such he was the aggressor. The incident took place in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel without premeditation on the part of the appellant. Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the manner in which the incident took place, at the most the appellant can be held guilty under Section 304 Part-II of IPC and considering her detention period since 3.6.2018, she may be sentenced to the period already undergone.

Reliance has been placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters ofLavghanbhai Devjibhai Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat , (2018) 4 SCC 329 and Kala Singh @ Gurnam Singh Vs. State of Punjab ,(2021) 10 SCC 744 .

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the contention of the appellant submits that the learned trial Court upon proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence has rightly passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence which need no interference by this Court. Therefore, the present appeal being devoid of any substance is liable to be dismissed.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

8. It is clear from the record of learned trial court that the appellant was charged under Section 302 of IPC and after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence learned trial Court convicted and sentenced under Section 302 of IPC as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment.

9. It is an admitted position before learned trial Court that the appellant is wife of the deceased Chhatrapal and PW-1 Chandrabhan Singh