In an appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC challenging a life imprisonment conviction for murder, the High Court dismissed the appeal. Upholding the Sessions Court's reliance on eyewitness and autopsy evidence, the Court affirmed the conviction of Mangaluram Nag under Section 302 IPC.
The appeal filed under Section 374(2) CrPC was hereby dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
D.B.: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sunii Kumar Sinha and Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhe Sh am Sharma N
Crimina! Aggeal No.898 of 2005
Aggeua‘nt
Resoondént
Mangaluram ’of Nag, son Abhiram Nag, aged about 4D years, occupation agriculture, resident of ViHage Zaakarpara, Makadi, Chowki Makadi, Police Station Kondagaon, District Bastar (Chhattisgarh) VEI’SUS Siate of Chhattisgarh
Present:
Mrs.SavitaTiwari, Advocate for the appellant. Mrs. Madhunisha Singh, Pane! Lawyer for the State.
Criminal Apgeai under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure
W
(09“August, 201 2)
MPe r Sunil Kumar Sinha J.:
This appeal is directed againet the judgment dated 28-112005, passed in Sessions Trial No.239/2005 by Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdaipur.
On 24-05-2005, at about 7130 a.m., deceased - Rampravesh was going on his motorc ycle.The allegaticns
2
are that the appellant met him on the way and assauited him by a Danda. Rampravesh sustained muttiple serious injuries over his skuii, face, leg and ankle and succumbed to those injuries. The autopsy surgeon found deep laceration on the right side of his face with fracture underlying; three teeth were uprooted; there was fracture of his right tibia and fibula bones; there was fracture on his right ankle bone; there was fracture of the auccipital bone beneath laceration_on the auocipital region. The injuries ‘object. were ante-modem caused by hard and blunt The autopsy surgeon, Dr. Shirlsh Soni (PW—6), opined that the cause of death was shock due to above injuries and the death was homicidal in nature. The incident was witnessed by Mangatu (PW-2) and Ronda (PW-3) who were travelling on a bicycle near the place of occurrence. They informed Naresh Kumar Sav (PW-1 brother of the deceased). Naresh Kumar Sav (PW-1) lodged First information Report (EXP-1). The investigating Officer reached the place of occurrent, gave notice (EXP-6) to the Panchas and prepared inquest (EXP-5) on the dead bdy of the deceased. The appellant was taken into custody and a Danda was seized from his possession vide EXP-4. The learned Sessions Judge relied on the testimonies of the eye witnesses and convicted and sentenced the appellant as above.
//“(u/qi
3
- Ronda (PW—3) also corroborated the evidence of Mangatu (PW-2).HedeposedthathewasalsotravellingalongwithMangatu (PW—2)ona bicycle. He saw that the appellant had assaulted the deceased by a Danda. The above two eye witnesses had immediately narrated the story to Naresh Kumar Sav (PWJI) who lodged the First lntormation Report (EXP-1)
@w
death or he would have received those injuries in accident. The evidence of the above two eye witnesses is further corroborated by the evidence of Naresh Kumar Sav (PW-1) as also the contents of the First information Report (EXP-1) which was promptly lodged by Naresh Kumar Sav (PW-1) as the incident took place at about 7:00 am. on 24-05-2005 and the First information Report (Exp-1) was lodged on the same day at about 7:50 a.m. The First Information Report (Ex.P-1) contains name of the appellant.
hereby dismissed.
Sd/
.
SUNIL KUMAR SIN'HA -
Judge .
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction of appellant under Section 302 of IPC and life imprisonment can be sustained against his appeal.
Whether the appeal filed under Section 374(2) CrPC should be allowed or dismissed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mangaluram Nag
State of Chhattisgarh
Sunil Kumar Sinha
Radhe Sham Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
