Dismissed¶¶28

Moturam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC13 Nov 2024CRA/202/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur — CRA No. 202 of 2017, decided 14.11.2024 (2024:CGHC:44587), single bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas — criminal appeal against conviction under S. 304(II) and S. 323 IPC dismissed on merit; lathi assault on head of deceased; post-mortem cause of death cardiac arrest/respiratory failure due to coma with fatal head injury; trial Court findings held not perverse or illegal; appellants already released after serving sentences.

What did the court decide?

On appreciation of the evidence and material on record, the findings recorded by the learned trial Court are not unreasonable or contrary to the evidence proving the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, and are neither perverse, illegal nor contrary so as to warrant interference by this Court. ¶¶27

Moturam Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:44587

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 202 of 2017

¶6

Moturam S/o Ringasu Uraon Aged About 45 Years R/o Vlllage Madneshwarpur, Police Chowki, Bariyo, Police Station Rajpur, District-Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶7

Smt. Manbaso W/o Moturam Uraon, Aged About 40 Years R/o Vlllage Madneshwarpur, Police Chowki, Bariyo, Police Station Rajpur, District-Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Appellants

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Bariyo, Police Station Rajpur, District-Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. Civil DistrictSurguja, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

For Appellants : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate

¶13

For State

¶14

: Ms. Avelin Juneja Gambhir, Panel Lawyer

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶16

Order On Board

¶17

14.11.2024

¶18

This criminal appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.11.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Ramanujganj, District - Surguja (C.G.) in S.T. R- 78/14 whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-

¶19

2 / 3

¶20

Conviction	Sentence
U/s 323 of I.P.C. of appellant No. 2	: 1 years R.I.
U/s 304(II) of I.P.C. of appellant No. 1	: 10 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 500 and additional R.I. for 1 month in case of default ofpayment of fine.
U/s 323 of I.P.C. of appellant No. 1	: 1 year R.I.s

¶21

In compliance of direction issued by this Court, the Secretary, Legal Services Authority has called status report from concerned Jail Superintendent wherein it has been mentioned that the appellant No. 1 has already been released from jail on 14.03.2022 and appellant No. 2 has already been released from jail on 17.11.2016 on completion of jail sentence awarded to them out of maximum sentence of 10 years and 1 year respectively by the learned trial Court.

¶22

The record of the case would demonstrate that the prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited documents (Ex. P/1 to P/15). The prosecution also exhibited the report of medical examination of the deceased and also application for calling medical examination of the deceased.

¶23

The complainant was examined before the trial Court as PW-8 wherein she has stated that on the date of incident at about 09:00 AM, she alongwith the deceased were removing tiles from roof of Kailash at village Madneshwarpur at that time, the appellants reached there and appellant No. 1 made assault on the head of the deceased by Lathi, due to which deceased sustained injury in his head and he felt down. The deceased was admitted to hospital for

¶24

3 / 3

¶25

treatment and died on 19.06.2024 at about 06:00 PM at District Hospital Ambikapur.

¶26

The prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant has also examined Dr. K.R. Tekam (PW-11) who has done the post-mortem of the deceased has stated that the death of the deceased was due to cardiac arrest, respiratory failure caused by coma as also head injury, which was fatal in nature. The time between death and postmortem must have been 06 to 36 hours.

¶27

On the basis of evidence and material placed on record as also the statement of the victim, the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 16.11.2016 has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforestated. This Court has gone through the evidence and material placed on record and from the appreciation of the same, it is quite vivid that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be unreasonable and contrary to the evidence brought on record by the prosecution proving the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the finding recorded by the trial Court cannot be said to be perverse, illegal or contrary which warrants interference by this Court.

¶28

In view of the above, the instant appeal stands dismissed on merit.

¶29

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶30

Manish

Moturam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moturam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Sundar Agrawal Vs Gulbir Singh Bhatiya

Dhubai Charan Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abis Exports India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Mr. Perneti Dinesh Kumar

Sadhu @ Roop Singh Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Rajwade Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Motu @ Sarvajeet Vs State Of Chhattisgarh