Guharam Chouhan And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CRA No. 341 of 2010
1. Guharam Chouhan, 5/0 Thakur Pam, aged about 46 years, Occupation - Labourer,
2. Ashok Kumar Chouhan, Sb Guharam, aged years, Occupation - Labourer, about 23
3. Sahnu Ram Chouhan, Sb Bodhiram, aged about 30 years, Occupation - Labourer.
P.S. Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh All Rio Village - Choranga, (CG) Appellant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through:
Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Police Station - Lailunga, Respondent For Appellant :
Shri Abhishek Saraf, Advocate.
For Respondent/State:
Shri Adil Minhaj, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel.
Judgment on Board by Justice Pritinker Diwaker 1411212017:
This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.3.2010 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh in ST No.57/2009 convicting the appellants under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation. 02.
In the present case, name of the deceased is Kamal Singh
..tv.
Paikra. It is said that on 20.1.2009 at about 3 pm Kamal Singh came near Community Hall of Gram Panchayat in a drunken condition where constructions activities were going on, enquired as to who is doing the construction and thereafter beat accused!appellant No.1 Guharam. Guharam in turn informed his son Ashok and nephew Sahnuram (appellants No. 2 & 3 herein), who along with Guharam came together and beat the deceased by hands, fists, slippers and club After sustaining injuries, Kamal Singh was taken to hospital and in the meanwhile, FIR (Ex P/i) was lodged by PW-3 Samaribai, wife of deceased Kamal Singh, against the appellants under Section 506, 323/34 of IPC However, during treatment Kamal Singh died in the hospital on 21 1 2009 at about 10 pm Unnumbered merg Ex P/30 was recorded at Police Station-City Kotwali on 21.1.
2009 on the information given by Ward Boy. Inquest over the dead body was conducted on 22.1.2009 vide Ex.P17 and thereafter, the body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on the same day vide Ex.P!20 by PW-13 Dr. J. Shrivastava. The autopsy surgeon noticed lacerated wound on right parietal of head, contusion over right shoulder upper part caused by hard and blunt object, intra-cerebral hematoma over right side of brain. In his opinion, the cause of death was coma due to intra-cranial hemorrhage on account of injury over head However, no definite opinion could be given regarding nature of injury and it would depend upon circumstantial evidence. Numbered merg Ex.p132 was thereafter recorded 24 1 2009 On the memorandum of accused/appellant No.1 Guharam Chouhan (Ex.P/14), seizure of clubs was effected vide Ex.
P/15 and as per FSL report (unexhibited) blood was found on it.
4/ Part-Il of IPC against the appellants.
03. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, the prosecution in which they denied the in
04. The trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering material available on record, by the impugned
05. Counsel for the appellants submits that the incident occurred all of and it appears that out of anger, all the appellants assaulted the his death. Thus, it is apparent that there was no intention on the part of incident occurred all of a sudden in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel.
He submits that at best the appellants are liable to be convicted under Section 304 Part-ll/34 of IPC and further considering their detention period which is more than four years, after conversion of their conviction into one under Section 304 Part-lI, they may be
p.
7/P P PP V os.
on the other hand, State counsel supporting the impugned judgment has submitted that conviction of the appellants is strictly fri accordance with law and there is illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment warranting interference by this Court.
07. Heard counsel for the respective parties and perused the ftaterial on record
08. PW-1 Jaisingh is an eyewitness to the incident. While supporting the prosecution case he has stated that at the place of construction of Community Hall, the deceased came in a drunken condition and enquird as to who is raising construction and then beat appellant No.1 Guharam and thereafter, appellant No.1 informed about the beating to other accused persons. All the accused persons came there, appellant Guharam was carrying club, all of them assaulted the deceased and caused him injuries. PW-2 Amaru and PW-3 Smt. Samaribai, other eyewitnesses to the incident have made almost similar statement as has been made by PW-1 that after the deceased beat appellant No.1 Guharam, all the accused persons came to the spot and caused injuries to the deceased as a result of which he died. In their lengthy cross-examination, all these witnesses remained firm and nothing could be elicited by the defence to its advantage. 09.
PW-13 Dr. Jayant Shrivastava conducted postmortem on the body of deceased on 22.1.2009 vide Ex.P120 and noticed lacerated wound on right parietal of head, contusion over right shoulder upper part caused by hard and blunt object, intra-cerebral hematoma over right side of brain. In his opinion, the cause of death was coma due to intra-cranial hemorrhage on account of injury over head However, no
/ / y definite opinion could be given regarding nature of injury and it would depend upon circumstantial evidence. This apart, in cross-examination he admits the suggestion that the above injuries could be caused due total!.
10.
PW-4 Pitamber, PW-5 Bachan Sal, PW-6 Bhanupratap, PW-7 Smt. Shantibai and PW-8 Shivcharan have turned hostile.
PW-9 Taransai is a hearsay witness. PW4O Lalit Kumar Paikra is a witness to spot map Ex.P12 and panchanama Ex.P13. PW-11 Fakirchand, PW 15 Padumlal Sidar, PW-1B Silbiryus Kujur, PW-19 SS Khan and PW-23 Ravishankar Raj, police personnel, assisted in the investigation. 11.
PW-12 Patiram witness to memorandum (Ex.P/14) and seizure (Ex.P/15) has supported the prosecution case. PW-14 Dr. Yogeshwar Singh treated the deceased first on 20.1.2009 when he was taken soon after the incident in injured condition and noticed certain simple injuries on the person of the injured vide EX.P121. He was also asked by the police for recording dying declaration of the deceased but considering the serious condition of the deceased he found the deceased unable to give such statement and gave report Ex.P/22 to this effect to the police. He also examined the weapon of offence club and opined that the injuries suffered by the victim could be caused by this weapon vide Ex.P/24. This witness also medically examined appellants Guharam - vide Ex.P/25, appellant Sahnuram vide Ex.P126 & appellant Ashok Kumar vide Ex.P/27 and found that they too had suffered simple injuries. PW-16 Kanhaiyalal, Patwari, prepared the spot map. PW-17 Uddoram Sidar, Ward Boy, gave merg intimation Ex.P130. PW-20 Gangaram is a witness to seizure Ex.P128. PW-21 Laxminbai has
, ;
is a witness to inquest turned hostile. PW-22 Motilal Suryavanshi witness to memorandum and seizure, Ex.P/7. PW-24 Sonsai, has DR Verma, investigating officer, has duly turned hostile.
PW-25 supported the prosecution case.
12.
Close scrutiny of the evidence makes it clear that on 201.2009 at about 3 pm the deceased came in a drunken condition to the place where construction of Community Hall of Gram Panchayat was going on and enquired as to who is doing the construction and thereafter beat accused/appellant No.1 Guharam, who in turn, called appellants 2 & 3 and then all of them beat the deceased by hands, fists, No.
club. The deceased was admitted in hospital where he slippers and was medically treated by PW-14 Dr. Yogeshwar Singh and he found certain simple injuries on his person, however, dying declaration of the deceased could not be recorded by him due to his serious condition During the course of rendering him unable to give such statement.
treatment, the deceased expired and as per postmortem report, the deceased had suffered lacerated wound on right parietal of head, contusion over right shoulder upper part caused by hard and blunt object and intra-cerebral hematoma over right side of brain and his cause of death was coma due to intra-cranial hemorrhage on account of head injury. However, no definite opinion could be given regarding nature of injury and the doctor stated that it would depend upon circumstantial evidence. The incident has been witnessed by PW-1 Jaisingh, PW-2 Amaru and PW-5 Bachan Sal. Prom their evidence it is clear that all the appellants participated in the said incident of beating of the deceased and the defence could not elicit anything from them in the cross-examination to make their evidence unreliable or shaky.
•. ::.
• .
1'
.
..*.
..
* .
Section 304 Part-ll/34 of IPC.
As regards the sentence part, from the record it is found that the appellants have remained inside for more than four years, they are on bail since 28 2 2013, the incident is of the year 2009 and therefore, in our considered view, no fruitful purpose would be sewed in:..sending them back to jail at this stage and rather the ends of justice would meet directed to pay a sum of Rs.1O,000/- each to PW-3 Samaribai, widow of the deceased, as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC 16.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. While acquitting the appellants of the charge under Section 302/34 of IPC, they are held guilty under Section 304 Part-ll/34 of IPC and are sentenced to the period already undergone by them.
However, each of them shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the concerned trial Court within six months from today, which shall be disbursed by the trial Court to PW-3 Samaribal, widow deceased, after due verification as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC. It is made clear that in case of default in payment of the said amount, the defaulting appellant(s) shall have to suffer additional RI for two years. Sd!- Pritinker Diwaker Arvind Singh Chandel Judge Judge