CRA No. 779 of 2010. Case: Fagu Ram Sinha and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh. Chhattisgarh High Court

Case NumberCRA No. 779 of 2010
CounselFor Appellant: Sudhir Verma and C.R. Sahu, Advocates and For Respondents: Rahul Tamaskar, P.L.
JudgesPritinker Diwaker, Actg. C.J. and Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 313; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 304, 323, 34
Judgement DateFebruary 22, 2017
CourtChhattisgarh High Court


Pritinker Diwaker, Actg. C.J.

  1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.10.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Dhamtari in ST. No. 50/2010 convicting the accused/appellants under Sections 302/149, 147 & 148 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5000/-, R.I. for two years with fine of Rs. 2000/- and R.I. for three years with fine of Rs. 3000/- respectively, plus default stipulations.

  2. There exists an old land dispute between the appellants and deceased family. It is said that on 29.04.2010 the accused persons were harvesting the crops of field in dispute, at that time deceased Thansingh and his wife Deepak Bai (P.W./3) reached the field and asked them not to harvest the crops. Further case of the prosecution is that after some altercation, the accused persons caused sickle injuries to the deceased as a result of which he died instantaneously. Merg intimation Ex. P/9 was recorded on 29.04.2010 at 9.30 am at the instance of Deepak Bai (P.W./3). Immediately thereafter at 9.35 am F.I.R. (Ex. P/10) was registered against the accused/appellants except appellant Nomin Sinha under Sections 302/34 and 323 of IPC. Inquest over the body of the deceased was prepared vide Ex. P/1. On 29.04.2010 body of deceased was sent for postmortem to Community Health Center, Magarlod vide Ex. P/19, where Dr. T.R. Dhruv (P.W./12) conducted autopsy on the body of deceased and gave his report Ex. P/12 opining the mode of death to be syncope due to excessive bleeding and the death was homicidal in nature. Injured Deepak Bai (P.W./3) was also medically examined by Dr. (Mrs.) Sharda Thakur vide Ex. P/15 who found pain on both buttock, back side and left wrist of the injured. After investigation, charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 302 IPC was filed against the accused/appellants, however, while framing the charge the trial Court has framed the charges against the accused/appellants under Sections 302/149, 147, 148 and 323/149 of IPC.

  3. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. The accused/appellants examined one defence witness in support of their case.

  4. The trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

  5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits as under:

    (i) that the accused/appellant No. 5-Nomin Sinha has not been named either in the merg intimation (Ex. P/9) or in F.I.R. (Ex. P/10) and her involvement shown subsequently is nothing but an improvement;

    (ii) that the only overt act alleged against accused/appellant Lagni Bai (A-4) as per the statement of prosecution witnesses is that she caught hold of the deceased and Deepak Bai (P.W./3) and not caused any injury to the deceased;

    (iii) that the statements of the eye-witnesses Deepak Bai (P.W./3), Ratiram Kanwar (P.W./4), Naresh Dhritlahare (P.W./5)...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT