Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.03.20 17:44:07 +0530 2025:CGHC:13250 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 2 of 2017 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Incharge, Police Station Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.). versus ... Appellant(s) 1 - Sant Kumar Sahu S/o Punau Sahu, Aged About 65 Years, Occupation Labourer, 2 - Ashwani @ Manu S/o Ramlal Yadav, Aged About 42 Years, Occupation Labourer, 3 - Yelaram Nishad S/o Gangaram Nishad, Aged About 38 Years, Occuaption Agriculturist, All Are R/o Village Khamhariya, Police Station And District- Bemetara (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s)/State
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, P.L. For Respondents No.1 & 2 None. For Respondent No.3 Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate. DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 20/03/2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the 2 legality and propriety of the judgment dated 27/01/2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.07/2015, whereby, the Respondents have been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC. 2) Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is, that on 07/11/2014, a merg intimation (Ex.P-31) and Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-1) was lodged by one Pawan Yadav, the father of the deceased, before the Police Station, Bemetara, stating therein, that on the previous day, i.e. 06/11/2014 at 12 PM (at noon) his son, namely, Deepak Yadav, the deceased, had gone alongwith Yelaram Nishad, Respondent No.3 herein, on his motorcycle and in the night around 8:30 PM, said Yelaram Nishad came to his house and informed that his son is lying near ‘Temri Khar’ and upon knowing the said fact, he alongwith the villagers reached the spot where he has seen that his son was lying nearby road in a pool of blood and, has raised doubt that said Yelaram Nishad might have assaulted his son and, owing to which he (Deepak Yadav) died. Based upon the inquiry of the said information, an FIR was registered against the Respondents in connection with Crime No.768/2014 with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC. Inquest of the dead body was conducted vide Ex.P-3 and was sent for autopsy which was conducted by Dr. Sharad Kumar Kohade (PW-10), who vide his report (Ex.P-19) opined the cause of death to be asphyxia and coma, which occurred due to strangulation and grievous injuries 3 and, thus, it was opined to be homicidal in nature. During the course of investigation, based upon the disclosure statement (Ex.P-8) of Respondent No.1- Sant Kumar Sahu, half shirt, full pant and stone with blood stained were recovered from him vide seizure memo (Ex.P-10) and the white shirt with blood stained was recovered from Respondent No.3- Yelaram Nishad vide Ex.P-6, based upon his disclosure statement (Ex.P-7) and, the articles so recovered, were sent for its chemical examination, but no report in this regard was placed on record. After completion of the usual investigation, the concerned Investigation Officer has submitted the charge sheet before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bemetara against the Respondents, in connection with Crime No.768/2014 with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC. The matter was, thereafter, committed to the learned Sessions Judge, Bemetara for its trial, who in turn, has framed the charges against Respondents under Section 302/34 of IPC and, the charges, so framed, were denied by them and claimed to be tried. 3) In order to bring home the guilt of the Respondents, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses and has exhibited 32 documents, while none was examined by the Respondents in their defence. 4) The Trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that neither the alleged articles were found to be seized from Respondent No.1- Sant Kumar Sahu and Respondent No.3- Yelaram Nishad, nor the prosecution has 4 established the fact that the respondents have assaulted the deceased in the Dhaba, owned by Vijay Saluja and Manish Saluja and, in absence of any cogent and, reliable evidence, the Respondents have been acquitted from the commission of the alleged offence mentioned herein-above and, being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred. 5) Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant/State submits that the finding recorded by the Trial Court, holding that the Respondents are not involved in connection with the alleged crime, is apparently contrary to the materials available on record, in as much as, the evidence led by the prosecution, has not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting them, as such. 6) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the Trial Court. 7) We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 8) From perusal of the record, it appears that the Respondents have been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC. According to the prosecution, an information was received by the Police Station, Bemetara from the father of the deceased that his son had gone alongwith the Respondent No.3- Yelaram Nishad on the fateful day on his motorcycle at noon and in the night, around 8:30 PM, he (Yelaram Nishad) informed him that 5 his son (Deepak Yadav) was lying nearby the road and when he reached there, his son was found dead in a pool of blood. It is alleged further by the prosecution that the Respondents have assaulted the deceased in the Dhaba, where they have intercepted the dispute at the relevant point of time. But, Vijay Saluja (PW-9) and Manish Saluja (PW-11), who were the owners of the alleged Dhaba have, however, failed to establish the alleged fact and, instead it was stated by them that though they used to come their Dhaba, but, have not seen that the respondents have assaulted the deceased on the fateful day. That apart, the father of the deceased, who lodged the alleged Dehati Nalishi and Merg Intimation has also turned hostile without supporting the prosecution story. 9) Insofar as, the stone, half shirt and full pant with blood stained recovered from Respondent No.1- Sant Kumar Sahu vide Ex.P-10 and the white full shirt with blood stained seized from Respondent No.3- Yelaram vide Ex.P-6, are concerned, it were not found to be established by the attesting witnesses, namely, Binuram Nishad (PW-4), Prem Kumar Sahu (PW-6) and also the father of the deceased, namely, Pawan Yadav (PW-1), nor the FSL report has been placed on record, though the alleged articles were sent its chemical examination. In such circumstances, the prosecution has virtually failed to produce any cogent and reliable evidence by which it could be presumed that the Respondents were involved in connection with the alleged crime and, the Trial Court has, therefore, 6 not committed any illegality in acquitting them from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 10) The appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. -Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge -Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Chandrakant