Dhedram Markam vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 472 Chatt

                                       -1-



                                                                                    NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                             CRA No. 187 of 2020

Dhedram Markam S/o Loluram Markam Aged About 32 Years R/o Kerapadar,
Fukagirola, Police Station And District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh., District :
Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

                                                                            ---- Appellant

                                     Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Kondagaon , District Kondagaon
Chhattisgarh., District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Respondent

22/06/2021 Shri Suresh Kumar Verma, counsel for the appellant.

Shri Lalit Jangde, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. Heard on IA No.1, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- with default clause vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31st December 2019 passed in S.T. No.106 of 2017 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (CG).

Learned counsel for appellant would argue that conviction of the appellant is based on unreliable eyewitness account of a child witness Chamra Ram (PW8) who is an interested witness as he is son of the deceased. He next submits that evidence of other witnesses did not corroborate by any other independent witness. It is

submitted that the prosecution has failed to come out with any strong motive on the part of the appellant to kill his own brother. Lastly, it is submitted that evidence of seizure of axe from the house of the appellant is doubtful in view of evidence of memorandum and seizure witnesses namely Bhagat Ram Mandavi (PW3) and Ramlal Markam (PW4).

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the application and submits that child witness has clearly stated regarding appellant assaulting his own brother with the help of axe which has remained un-impeached in the cross-examination. Both the seizure witnesses Bhagat Ram Mandavi (PW3) and Ramlal Markam (PW4) have stated that axe was found in the house of the appellant. Learned counsel for the State further submits that the ocular testimony of witness Chamra Ram (PW8) is corroborated from medical evidence and what has been stated by Dr. Aditya Chaturvedi (PW9) regarding nature of injury and also the weapon with which the injury could be caused. FSL report proves presence of human blood on the axe.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, taking into consideration the nature of evidence, particularly taking into consideration the eyewitness account and recovery of blood stained axe from the house of the appellant, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence.

The application is accordingly rejected.

List the appeal for final hearing.

                    Sd/-                                           Sd/--
          (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava)                     (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
                   Judge                                         Judge
Praveen