Dismissed

Daulatram v. State of C.G.

Chhattisgarh HC7 Jan 2015CRA/257/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by a convict challenging his conviction and life imprisonment sentence for murdering a 10-year-old child. The court held that the circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony sufficiently proved the appellant's guilt and found no illegality in the trial court's judgment.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merits with no illegality found in the conviction. Relief: Affirmation of conviction and sentence of life imprisonment.

Daulatram Vs State of C.G. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.)

¶2

Criminal Appeal No. Z?7 of 2012

¶3

APPELLANT/ Daulatram, aged about 23 years, S/o

¶4

In Jail

¶5

Sukhram, Occupation- Labourer, R/o Village Balakpodi, Tikarapara P.S. Kapu, ^5^- ll^......-,»«••• Distf. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶6

^!iSWBfi?i";"";"».'••'

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

RESPONDENT State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.

¶9

Kapu, Distt. Raigarh (C.6.)

¶10

CRIMINAL A^PEAL U/S. 374 f2) OF Cr.P.C.

¶11

AGAINST THE JU&GEMENT AN& CONVICTION t>ATED 12.01.2012 PASSEb IN SESSIQN TRIAL N0. 26/10

¶12

BY 1st ADNTIONAL SESSldN JUDGrRAISARH (C.6.)

¶13

Cr.A. N67^57 of 2012 Page 1 of 6

¶14

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASR-UR Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2012

¶15

Coram : HON'BLE MR.T.P.SHARMA & HON'BLE MR. I. S. UBOWEJA, JJ.

APPELLANT

Daulatram

(InJail)

Versus

RESPONDENT

State of Chhattisgarh

¶22

[Criminal Appeal underSection 374(2) ofthe Code ofCffmTnal Procedure, 1973]

¶23

Present:-

¶24

Ms. Shipra Biswas, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sumit Jhanwar, Pane^Lawyerjor the State.

¶25

:-S i%.XWS"s"s ;'SJLU_DiGgUJSiL3Vl"

¶26

Perl.S.UEKiwuja, J.:-

¶27

. (Passed^{on07thJanuaTyi!'2QCT5)} „„, - ;

¶28

, Challenge in this^p|iea^isj tlie judgment of corivictjeH-and order of sentence dated 12,Q'1.2QJ1S passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge Raigarh (C.G.) in Sessigris;Tna) No. 26/2010, whereby & whereunder, after holding the appellantguilty^foFcausing homicidal death amounting to murder. of Gajanan, convicted him'Einclei-iSection 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC') and sentenced.him to undergo imprisonment forlife. £"

¶29

Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being any iota of evidence the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed an illegality.

¶30

As per case of the prosecution, on fateful day of 26.11.2009 at about 4.00 p.m., deceased - Gajanan, aged about 10 years, son of Pietrarri (PW-1) had gone for grazing cattle near the village. At about 5.30 p.m., Dashrath Sai (PW-4) came to home of Pietram (PW-1) and informed him that dead body of his son Gajanan was lying nearthe fleld in injured condition. Pietram (PW-1) ran away to spot and saw that his son was died and injuries were found over

¶31

Cr.A.No. 257 of 2012 Page 2 of 6

¶32

''<.

¶33

his head and neck. Villagers Bachansai, Hari Sai (PW-8), Angad Rawat (PW-6), Ram Sagar (PW-3) and Shantibai (PW-2) have stated him that they have seen the incident, when his son was grazing the cattle, at that time accused/appellant had attacked him by axe and fled away from the spot. Pietram (PW-1) reported the incident at Police Station, Kapu. Morgue (Ex.P/2)^andFIR (Ex.P-1)^{wererecorded.} Investigating Officer left for scene of occurrence and after summoning the witnessesj/jde Ex.P-4, inquest over the dead body of the deceased was prepared vide Ex.P-3. Spot map was

¶34

prepared vide Ex. P/7. Bloodstained and plain soil were recovered from the spot vide Ex.B(|BtSlatl|e|iWtlae a|e|ileef|vas,seized vide Ex.P/9. Dead body of Ihe^deBeased was sent fbr autopsy tb'th®epnimunity Health Centre,

¶35

^haramjaigarh vide Ex.R-14A, "where Dr. B.L. Bha[ga;ftPW-9) conducted autopsy vide Ex.P/'14and.fouii£l.fallowinginjuries and symRtoms :-

¶36

(i) Incised wound^iveCTiaperpart of left sidejgf neck of5x 3 x 3 cm, dotted blood inl&'arotjnd wound, underlying blood vessel are separated, mai'gin ofyroundiis regular.

¶37

(ii) Incised wound in mitidlepart of left side of neck of3 x 2x 1 cm, clotted •^"-•^ •.";";::ri

¶38

rf1 , blood in & around wound, margin is dear.

¶39

(iii) Incised wound in post aspect of neck of 4 x 1 cm, clotted blood in & around wound, margin isclear.

¶40

On internal examination carotid vessel in neck was found cut and

¶41

(iv) clotted blood in & around wound.

¶42

Cause of death was severe bleeding by injuries to blood vessels and was homicidal in nature.

¶43

¶44

During the course of investigation, the appellant was taken into custody, he

¶45

made disclosure statement of axe vide Ex.P/10 and the same was recovered

¶46

Cr.A.No. 257 of 2012 Page 3 of 6

¶47

at his instance vide Ex.P/11. Clothes of the deceasedtwere sealed and

¶48

seized vide Ex.P/16. Seized articles were sent for chemical examination to FSL vide Ex.P/17and received receiptvide Ex.P/18.

¶49

Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of 'the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Code'). After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dharamjaigarh, who in turn, committedTRe'case to the Court of Sessions, Raigarh, from where learned Additional Sessions Judge received the case on transfer for trial. ,

¶50

In order tp [prGve the guilt of the aceuSe|jfaRpe|lant, the prosecution has exainined as many as eleven witnesses. Accusedswas examined under Section 313 of the:,GQffei,3in which.he denied the circUstances appearing against him and pleadeftinnQcence and false implication in crime in question is daimed. He had exaEnlned^iVIUnna Ram Dhobi as DW-1, who has stated that mental status of accused /appellant was not good since last 10 to 12 years, but defence?has not produced any medical certificate or documents in ' • this regard. , : ::.-Wi^ •.W.; Si.

¶51

After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned.

¶52

We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the judgment impugned and record oftrial Court.

¶53

¶54

Learngd counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that conviction of the appellant is substantially based on the evidences of Shantibai (PW-2),^Ram Sagar (PW-3), Angad Rawat (PW-6) and Hari Sai (PW-8), but their evidences does riot inspires confidence and is not trustworthy. There are several

¶55

¶56

Cr.A.No. 257 of 2012 Page 4 of 6

¶57

contradictions and omissions in their evidences. Judgrnent of conviction is notwell founded. .

¶58

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the appeal and submits that evidence of Shantibai (PW-2), Ram Sagar (PW-3), Angad Rawat (PW-6) and Hari Sai (PW-8) are sufficient for drawing aninference that the appellant has mercilessly caused injuries to the innocent child till his death. As per evidence of Dr. B.L. Bhagat (PW-9) and autopsy'report (Ex.P/14) three cut injuries were seen over the neck and carotid arteries & veins were found cut. Death of deceased Gajaiign^.was homicidal in nature.

¶59

In orclerto appreciate.the argumehts'!advaKcecti;e>n behalf of the parties, we have to examine the evidence adduced on behalf ctlMhie [aarties.

¶60

In the present case, RomlcidaiycleaSlsis a result of fatal injynes found over the body of deceased Gajariand-ias'npt been disputed substantially on behalf of the appellant. On the GtlTgi- hand, it is also established by the evidence of Shantibai (PW-2), Ram' Sagar^PW-3), Angad Rawat (PW-6) and Hari Sai. (PW-8), Morgue ®x.P/2^and/F:lR(Ex.P-1), Dr. B.L. Bhagat (PW-9) and c^jtopsy report (Ex.PU4) thattheyeath of deceased - Gajanan was homicidal ift nature.

¶61

As regards complicity of the appellant in crime in question is concerned, conviction is substantially based on the evidence of Shantibai (PW-2), Ram Sagar (PW-3), Angad Rawat (PW-6) and Hari Sai (PW-8). As per their statement, they were present near the field at the time of incident, they have seen that the accused/appellant was assaulting deceased - Gajanan by axe on his neck, by his assault deceased fell down and died instantaneously. After assaulting the deceased, the accused fled from the spot. Thereafter, the witnesses came to their houses. Ram Sagar (PW-3) has stated that he has narrated the incident to his father Mahesh. Dashrath (PW-4) has stated

¶62

Cr.A.No. 257 of 2012 Page 5 of 6

¶63

¶64

that at about 5.00 p.m., his son Hari Sai (PW-8) Has narrated about the incident to him, then, he informed the same to Pietram (PW-1), who is father of the deceased. Pietram (PW-1) has also stated that he was informed about the incident by Dashrath (PW-4), then he rushed to place of incident and saw the dead body of his son Gajanan. He was injured, his neck was cut and blood was oozing from his neck, thereafter, he reported the incident to police station, Kapu. ——,.

In this case all eyewitnesses have corroborated the evidence of each other.

¶71

Defence has cross-examined these witnesses at length. In their crossexaminatibri,athe^|liBveispecifically|l|piosB(:lithat the appellant has caused injyries to the deceased. In there cross-exgmmation nothing has been suggested by the defence to discredit their testimontes;& Eyewitnesses evidence finds corroborafiHn fToiTi friedical evidence, which is sufficient for drawing an inferenee^ ;tt'(ati,the; appellant has eaused homicidal death amounting to murder ofthe cteceased.

¶72

As regards the questi6njflpnotive,i in case of direct evidence motive losses its importance, even otherwise motive only aids in criminality and can be inferred on.the basis of nature of injury, kind of weapon used, part of the body effected and other similar circumstances.

¶73

As per case of prosecution, the appellant has caused multiple injuries upon neck and cut the arteries and vessels, which is a vital part of human body, which shows the merciless act of the appellant, which is sufficient for drawing an inference that the appellant has caused homicidal death amounting to murder bf the deceased.

¶74

Afterappreciating the evidence available on record, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned.

¶75

¶76

./
<*s.

¶77

Cr.A.No. 257 of 2012
Page 6 of 6

¶78

On close scrutiny of the evidenee, we do not flnd any illegality or infirmity in .

¶79

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

¶80

Consequently, the appeal, being devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

¶81

L^ chandra

¶82

Sd/-.
Sd/-
Inder SinghUboweja
T.P.Sharma
Judge^.
Judge

¶83

Daulatram v. State of C.G.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daulatram v. State of C.G.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chowa Ram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramnath Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gulabbu @ Santosh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Keshbo Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.duwasia Bai And Ors. Vs Khamhan And Ors.