HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Phool Bai and Ors – Appellant
Versus
State Of C.g – Respondent
CRA 780/2012
['ARJUN YADAV', '', 'PUNIT RUPAREL', 'ARVIND DUBEY', 'ABIRA BHATTACHARYA', 'MATEEN SIDDIQUI', 'SANDEEP SINGH', 'RUCHI NAGAR', 'NARENDRA MEHAR', 'ishan verma', 'FAISAL AKHTAR', 'A G']
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 780 of 2012
1. Phool Bai And Ors W/o Kishan Chawhan Aged About 58 Years R/o Village
Kondamedi, Thana Palandur , Distt. Bhandara Maharastra , Maharashtra
2. Dhaurle Chawhan S/o Kishan Chawhan Aged About 28 Years R/o Village
Kondamedi, Thana Palandur , Distt. Bhandara Maharastra , District :
Bhandara, Maharashtra
3. Mahuna Bai S/o W/o Hiralal Nath Jogi Aged About 25 Years R/o Village
Kondamedi, Thana Palandur , Distt. Bhandara Maharastra , District :
Bhandara, Maharashtra
4. Mana Bai W/o Ashok Nath Jogi Aged About 20 Years R/o Village
Kondamedi, Thana Palandur , Distt. Bhandara Maharastra , District :
Bhandara, Maharashtra
---- Appellants
Versus
• State Of C.G., Through - P.S. Devri , Distt. Balod C.G. , Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For Appellants
:
Shri Mateen Siddique & Shri Arvind
Dubey, Advocates
For Respondent
:
Shri V.A. Goverdhan, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal
Judgement
P. Diwaker, J
05/03/2018
1. Present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.8.2012 passed
by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balod in Sessions Trial No.10/2012
convicting the accused/appellants for the offence punishable under
Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and sentencing
each of them to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs.50/-, in default to
undergo additional RI for 3 months.
2. As per prosecution case, deceased Manharan, his wife Mankarma (PW-3)
and the appellants were 'nomads', that is to say, they have no permanent
abode and they used to travel from place to place to earn their livelihood
by begging and fortune-telling. It is stated that on 27.12.2011 the
accused/appellants, deceased and other persons were staying behind
Santosh Hotel, Maaridevri, Tahsil Dondilohara, District Durg. On the same
day at about 8.30 p.m., accused/appellant Fulbai was cooking food on
oven and deceased Manharan was warming up himself from the fire of
oven. On account of foot of the deceased coming into contact with burning
log, the vegetable being cooked spilled over the ground as a result an
altercation ensued between the accused persons and the deceased and
in the course of altercation, they beat the deceased by hands, fists and
kicks due to which the deceased became unconscious. Deceased was
taken to the hospital where his MLC was done by Dr. Rajesh Sadani
(PW-8) vide Ex.P-16 and he advised for x-ray examination. However, on
x-ray examination, no bony injury was noticed. Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-3)
was recorded on 12.12.2011 at the instance of Mankarma (PW-1) and
based on which un-exhibited FIR was recorded against the appellants
under Section 307/34 of IPC. During the course of treatment in the
hospital, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on 15.12.2011. On the
basis of information received by a Ward Boy of the hospital, un-numbered
merg (Ex.P-6) was recorded on 15.12.2011. Post-mortem examination
over the body of deceased was conducted by Dr. S.K. Bagh (PW-7) vide
Ex.P-7 and he noticed dark & red coloured ecchymosis over right occipital
parietal region of 6x4cm & 6x5cm respectively. Skull bone intact but
massive sub-dural haemorrhage was present on right temporal parietal
region. Contusion of 1.5 cm was present over right temporal lobe. Multiple
small clotted blood was present. As per opinion of autopsy surgeon,
cause of death was due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of head
injury and its complication and the duration of death was within 24 hours
prior to the post-mortem examination. Numbered Merg (Ex.P-6) was
registered on 31.12.2012.
3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet under Section 302/34 IPC
was filed against the accused/appellants and accordingly the charge was
framed by the trial Court against them. So as to hold the accused/
appellants guilty, the prosecution has examined 08 witnesses in suppor