CRA No. 1074 of 2004 and Acquittal Appeal No. 371 of 2010. Case: Mukesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.. Chhattisgarh High Court

Case Number:CRA No. 1074 of 2004 and Acquittal Appeal No. 371 of 2010
Party Name:Mukesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: Hemant Gupta, Advocate and For Respondents: Vivek Sharma, Govt. Advocate
Judges:Pritinker Diwaker and Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, JJ.
Issue:Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 313; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 100, 302, 307, 324, 34, 96
Judgement Date:April 11, 2017
Court:Chhattisgarh High Court
 
FREE EXCERPT

Judgment:

Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, J.

  1. Both these appeals arise out of same judgment dated 04/12/2004 in S.T. No. 75/98 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon convicting and sentencing the appellants in S.T. No. 75/98 and acquitting co-accused Jogu @ Yogendra from the charges against him.

  2. The appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 1074 of 2004 stand convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced with life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/-, under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI of two years with fine of Rs. 500/- and under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI of 7 years with fine of Rs. 2000/- with default stipulations.

  3. State has filed acquittal appeal challenging the acquittal of Jogu @ Yogendra in the impugned judgment.

  4. The brief facts of the case are that on 22/02/1998 at about 11-00 p.m. in the night, Ramesh Kumar Gupta (PW-15) along with Durga Prasad (PW-16) were going towards the residence of deceased Munna when all of sudden appellants along with acquitted accused Jogu @ Yogendra armed with sword, club and battle Axe started assaulting them, thereby causing injuries to Ramesh Kumar Gupta (PW-15), Durga Prasad (PW-16) and deceased Munna Lal. All of them were admitted in government hospital at Rajnandgaon. One information vide Ex. P/22 was sent to Police Station, Basantpur, Rajnandgaon. On arrival of Police Officer in the hospital, unnumbered FIR Ex. P/20 was lodged by Ramesh Kumar Gupta (PW-15). On the basis of which later on a numbered FIR Ex. P/24 was recorded registering an offence under Section 307 of IPC.

  5. Injured Ramesh Kumar (PW-15), Durga Prasad (PW-16) and Munna Lal (Deceased) were medically examined by Dr. Harish Kumar Joshi (PW-6) vide Ex. P/4A, P/5A and P/6A and reported the injuries found on the persons of the injured. Injured Munna Lal expired on 27/02/1998 while undergoing treatment in the Hospital. Inquest was conducted vide Ex. P/11 and postmortem was conducted by Dr. V.K. Sao (PW-11) vide Ex. P/12A in which he opined that deceased died as a result of antemortem head injury. Further in the investigation, seizure of blood stained clothes of injured persons were made vide seizure memos Ex. P/16, Ex. P/17 and Ex. P/18. One sword was seized from the possession of co-accused Jogu vide Ex. P/13, another sword was seized from the possession of Laxmi Narayan vide Ex. P/23. Seized articles were examined by Dr. Harish Kumar Joshi (PW-6) and report submitted vide Ex. P/7A, Ex. P/8A and Ex. P/9A. Spot map Ex. P/19 was prepared by Patwari and spot map Ex. P/20 was prepared by investigating officer. Seized articles were sent for FSL Examination and FSL report (Ex. P/27) and Serological report (Ex. P-28) was obtained. Appellants and co-accused Jogu @ Yogendra were charge-sheeted for trial under Sections 307, 302/34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act.

  6. Appellant Laxmi Narayan and accused Jogu @ Yogendra were charged under Section 302/34, 307/34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act. Appellant Mukesh Kumar and Mohan Lal were charged under Section 302/34 and 307/34 of IPC. The appellants and co-accused Jogu denied all the charges and demanded for trial. Prosecution examined 23 witnesses. On Examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. the appellants and co-accused denied all the incriminating evidence against them in the prosecution evidence, pleaded innocence and false implication. It was submitted in defence, that in the said incident, Ramesh Kumar (PW-15), Durga Prasad (PW-16) with deceased Munna Lal have assaulted appellant Mohan Lal with sword and pipe. Remesh Kumar (PW-15) was also carrying revolver. Remaining appellants intervened to save Mohan Lal. In the meanwhile, appellants were also assaulted by Ramesh Kumar (PW-15), Durga Prasad (PW-16) and deceased Munna Lal using sword and rod, thereby causing injuries to them. On report of the accused persons they were medically examined. Defence examined three witnesses. The impugned judgment was passed in which co-accused Jogu @ Yogendra was acquitted of all the charges, whereas remaining accused persons the appellants were acquitted of charge under Section 251(B) of Arms Act, but convicted under the remaining charges and sentenced as mentioned in the paragraph above.

  7. The grounds in appeal are these, that the evidence of Ramesh Kumar (PW-15), Durga Prasad (PW-16) and others were not trustworthy and could not have been made the basis of conviction against the appellants. The appellants as well suffered injuries in the same incident which has not been explained by the prosecution and on lodging of FIR by the appellants, the complainant and others have been tried and convicted in the counter case, which indicates that the complainant party was aggressor, who have cooked up a false story in defence. The medical evidence on record does not support the case of prosecution, thus the trial Judge has erroneously appreciated the evidence of prosecution and recorded finding of conviction against the appellants. Prayer to set-aside the impugned judgment has been made.

  8. ...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL