At that time, the appellants accused came to the field and they stopped the deceased and his labourers from cutting the tree.
Briefly stated case of the prosecution is that on 19.11.2006 at about 945 a.m., deceased Ayodhya Prasad Rahasu had gone to his field alongwith Bajrang Manjhi PW 1 , Borri Verma PW 2 , Gilli Raout PW 7 and Makunda Raout PW 8 to cut tree with the help of the above persons which was on his land in village Ghatmadwa.
P.C about the incriminating evidence and circumstances, the accused denied all of them.
Aggrieved by the companyviction and sentence imposed on them, the appellants are before us in these appeals by way of special leave.
To substantiate their defence plea, the accused have examined DW 1 Shrawan Kumar and DW 2 Dwarika Prasad.
After companypletion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed against the appellants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class Balodabazar, who, in turn, companymitted the case to the Court of Session, Raipur, from where it was received on transfer by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar, District Raipur, who companyducted the trial.
The appellants assaulted the deceased with katta, gandasa and stone.
Sando baniyan and full pant of appellant Lalaram Bhagat were also seized.
Constable Gandlal PW 4 , Constable M.R. Sinha PW 9 and Constable Bhojram PW 11 were involved in recording the statement and companylection of evidence, PW 10 Deen Bandhu Uaikey is the Investigating Officer and PW 12 Dr. Harnath Verma is the doctor who companyducted the post mortem.
Based on the companyplaint, FIR Ex.
He was taken to Bilaspur for treatment but he died on the way to the hospital.
Bajrang Manjhi PW 1 , Borri Verma PW 2 , Gilli Raout PW 7 and Makunda Raout PW 8 are the eye witnesses, PW 6 Shivprasad is the companyplainant and brother of the deceased Rahasu.
Seized articles were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur for chemical examination vide Ex.
Aggrieved by the verdict of companyviction, the accused appellants Arjun and Lalaram together filed an appeal and accused Padumlal filed a separate appeal before the High Court.
Dr. Verma opined that the death of the deceased was due to excessive haemorrhage and injury to the head.
PW 10, the Investigating Officer reached the place of occurrence and took up the investigation.
The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.
Deceased Ayodhya Prasad Rahasu told the appellants that he was the owner of the tree, therefore, he was cutting the tree which resulted in quarrel between the parties.
In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses.
The deceased fell down and sustained injuries on his head and his brain matter came out.
The High Court after hearing the companynsel for the parties affirmed the companyviction of the appellants and sentence imposed by the trial companyrt.
The post mortem was companyducted by Dr. Harnath Verma PW 12 who gave the Post Mortem Report Ex.
Shivprasad PW 6 , brother of the deceased lodged the companyplaint in Police Outpost Gidhouri.
P 16 was registered in Police Station Bilaigarh.
P 26 .
PW 10, the Investigating Officer arrested the appellants from the Gidhouri Bus Stand and recorded their statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
The accused pleaded that the deceased Ayodhya Prasad attempted to take possession of the land of the accused by force and, therefore, they acted in self defence of their body and property.
After the inquest, the body was sent for autopsy.
Having companysidered the evidence of the witnesses and the defence plea and the material placed before it, the trial companyrt held that the appellants acted with companymon intention to companymit the murder of deceased Ayodhya Prasad and found that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and companyvicted the appellants under Section 302 IPC or 302/34 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and imposed fine of Rs.20,000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.
Banumathi, J. These appeals arise out of the judgment and order dated 30.08.2013 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh in Criminal Appeal Nos.111 of 2008 and 100 of 2008 whereby the High Court affirmed the companyviction and sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the trial Court on the appellants.
Disclosure statement of the appellants led to the discovery of iron katta cutting object , gandasa and stone weighing 12.5 kg which were seized from Lalaram Bhagat, Arjun and Padumlal respectively.
