SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
AMIT RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRA 1480/2018



Advocates:
['S P SAHU', '', 'J R SAHU', 'A G']

Page 1 of 9

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Judgment Reserved on : 16.11.2021

Judgment Delivered on : 08.12.2021

CRA No.1480 of 2018

Amit Ram, S/o- Lohar Sai Painkra, Aged about- 18 years 6

months, R/o- Village Amartha, Police Station- Shankergarh,

District- Balrampur (C.G.)

---- Appellant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Police Station Sanna, District-

Jashpur (C.G.)

---- Respondent

For Appellant

: Shri S. P. Sahu, Advocate

For Respondent/State

: Shri Chitendra Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya

CAV Judgment

1.

This appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 28.06.2018, passed by the

Sessions Judge, Jashpur, District- Jashpur (C.G.) in Session

Case No. 17/2018, whereby the appellant Amit Ram stands

convicted and sentenced as under:-

Conviction

Sentence

Under Section 304 part-II

of Indian Penal Code

R.I. for five years with fine of Rs.

1,000/- and in default of

payment of fine amount further

R.I. for three months.

2.

As per prosecution case, PW/1 Nandkumar Painkra,

Page 2 of 9

appellant Amit Ram and deceased Dhaneshwar were

working under Parmanand Chouhan and would operate the

swing of Parmanand Chouhan. Prior to one day of incident

i.e. 25.11.2017 the swing of Parmanand Chouhan was

installed in the fair at village Champa and on the next day

i.e. 26.11.2017 when fair was over and while PW/13

Nandkumar Painkra and the appellant were unbolting the

swing, deceased Dhaneshwar started raising dispute with

them over moblie phone. In this process, the appellant

assaulted the deceased with a club on his head. However,

next morning as the deceased was not feeling well he was

taken to hospital at village Champa and from there he was

taken to Ambikapur Hospital where he died on 27.11.2017.

3.

Merg intimation was given by PW/9 Utkarsh Kumar. During

investigation, inquest over the dead body was conducted

vide Ex.P/9 and thereafter, PW/12 Dr. B.C. Painkra

cunducted post-mortem vide Ex.P/17 and notice following

injuries: (i) lacerated wound present over right temporo

parietal region of skull sized 2”x1”x1/2 cm, (ii) abrasion over

right leg, lower portion (front part) sized 1/2”x1” and (iii)

abrasion over left knee joint (front portion) sized 1”x1/2”.

4.

PW/12 Dr. B.C. Painkra opined the cause of death as coma,

mode of death as subdural haemorrhage due to injury

number 1 and the

death was homicidal in nature.

5.

Site plan Ex.P/1 and P/15 were prepared, plain and blood

stained soil were seized from the place of occurance and on

Page 3 of 9

the memorandum of appellant No. 1 bamboo club, half

jeans pant & one full shirt were seized vide Ex.P/4. Clothes

of the deceased were also seized vide Ex. P/11. As per

Progress report and Aadhar Card of the appellant were

seized vide Ex.P/12, he was found to be above 18 years of

age on the date of incident. The seized articles were sent to

FSL for chemical examination and report of FSL is Ex.P/6.

According to which, human blood was found on the club and

clothes seized from the accused as well as on the cloths of

the deceased. After recording statements of the witnesses

and completing the investigation charge-sheet was filed

against the appellant u/s 302 of IPC.

6.

The trial Court framed charge u/s 302 of IPC against the

appellant, who denied the same and prayed for trial.

7.

Prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as

14 witnesses and statement of the appellant was also

recorded u/s 313 of CrPC where he denied the incriminating

circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution

case, pleaded innocence and prayed for trial. However, no

witness was examined or any evidence aduced by him in his

defence.

8.

The trial court, considering overall material available on

record by the im

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top