1 2025:CGHC:6493-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 327 of 2010 State Of Chhattisgarh Through : Station Incharge, Police Station, Arang, District Raipur (CG) ... Appellant versus 1 - Rupendra Hirwani (Sahu) S/o Ketram Sahu, aged about 32 years. 2. Janak Ram Sahu, S/o Kachruram Sahu, aged about 32 years. 3. Domesh Kumar Sahu, S/o Bhagat Ram Sahu, aged about 22 years All are R/o of village : Paraskol, P.S. : Arang, District Raipur (CG). ---- Respondents For Appellant : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer as well as Mr. Kabir Kalwani, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Manoj Paranjape, Advocate for the Complainant For Respondents No.1 and 3 : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate appears along with Mr. Anjeev Kumar Singh and Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocates For Respondent No.2 : None, though served. Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board. 05.02.2025 Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.02.10 10:32:07 +0530 2 and propriety of the judgment dated 31.03.2005, passed by the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (CG) in Sessions Trial No.390/2004, whereby, the respondents have been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 398 and 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 23.08.2004 at 09.00 PM, deceased- Narsingh Prasad Sahu had gone along with his nephew- Yogesh Kumar Sahu to village- Devri for the purpose of his treatment by the motorcycle and after returning from the said village, and when they reached near the “Devri Dodki Nala”, accused No.1- Rupendra, who was hidden near the bushes, came with a sword and assaulted the deceased- Narsingh Prasad Sahu as well as said Yogesh Kumar Sahu. It is alleged further that he immediately informed the said incident to his son, namely, Tamradhwaj Sahu (PW-1), who in turn, lodged the merg intimation (Ex.P-2) and First Information Report (Ex.P-1). On account of the alleged incident, Narsingh Prasad Sahu was died and his dead body was sent for autopsy, which was conducted by Dr. Abhay Singh Parihar (PW-7), who opined the cause of death owing to excessive bleeding on account of the injury caused on his head as well as on his right and left hand and, accordingly, the death was opined to be homicidal in nature vide his report (Ex.P-15). The disclosure statement of accused No.3- Domesh Kumar Sahu was recorded vide Ex.P-7 and based upon which, sword and the T-shirt of blue colour with blood stained was recovered on 02.09.2004 vide Ex.P- 8, while the shirt with blood stained was seized from accused No.1- Rupendra Hirwani (Sahu) on 24.08.2004 vide Ex.P-10. The alleged 3 seized articles were sent for chemical examination on 09.11.2004, however, no report in this regard was placed on record. After completing the usual investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur in connection with Crime No.151/2004 against the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 398, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC and the matter was thereafter committed to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur for its trial, who in turn, has framed the charges against the respondents with regard to the alleged offence as mentioned herein-above, which was denied by them and claimed to be tried. 3. The prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses and has exhibited 31 documents in order to bring home the guilt of the accused/respondents, 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 the respondents have been falsely implicated by the prosecution with regard to the alleged crime and, accordingly, they have been acquitted with regard to the alleged offence and being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/State as well as the counsel for the Complainant submits that the findings recorded by the trial Court holding that the respondents are not the authors of the alleged crime, are apparently contrary to law, in as much, the evidence led by the prosecution, particularly, the statement of injured eye- 4 witness, namely, Yogesh Kumar Sahu (PW-10) have not been scanned properly and thereby, erred in acquitting the respondents, as such. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has supported the 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 on 23.08.2004, when the deceased- Narsingh Prasad Sahu was returning along with his nephew – Yogesh Kumar Sahu by his motorcycle from village- Devri and when they reached near the “Devri Dodki Nala”, they have been intercepted by accused No.1-Rupendra, who assaulted them with the aid of sword and the injured Yogesh Kumar Sahu has informed the occurrence of the alleged incident to deceased’s son, namely, Tamradhwaj Sahu, who lodged the merg intimation (Ex.P-2) and First Information Report (Ex.P-1). A bare perusal of these, reports (Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-2) would show that on the fateful day, the deceased- Narsingh Prasad Sahu as well as said Yogesh Kumar Sahu was assaulted by accused No.1- Rupendra alone, with the aid of sword, but when said Yogesh Kumar Sahu (PW-10) was examined before the Court, he, however, exaggerated the alleged incident, by saying that they have not only been intercepted and assaulted by accused No.1- Rupendra, but the other accused persons, namely, Janak Ram Sahu and Domesh Kumar Sahu have also assaulted them. Although, MLC report (Ex.P-12) of said Yogesh Kumar Sahu, made by Dr. G.P. Chandrakar (PW-6) would show that he sustained as many as 8 injuries and injuries Nos. 1 to 6 5 are opined by him to be simple in nature, while injury No.7 was found to be caused by hard and blunt object and insofar as injury No.8 is concerned, he was referred to Medial College Hospital, Raipur for ascertaining the nature of the said injury. However, no report from the said Hospital was placed on record in this regard. That apart, the alleged seized articles, recovered from accused No.3- Domesh Kumar Sahu and accused No.1-Rupendra vide Ex. P-10, were sent for the chemical examination on 09.11.2004, but no report has, however, been placed on record. Besides, insofar as accused No.2-Janak Ram Sahu is concerned, we, however, do not find any evidence whatsoever against him, yet he has been implicated with regard to the alleged offence occurred on 23.08.2004. 9. It reveals further from the statement of Tamradhwaj Sahu (PW-1), who was the son of the deceased- Narsingh Prasad Sahu, particularly, paragraph 23 of his testimony, that the alleged report was lodged by him at the instance of Ishwar Prasad Sahu (PW-3), the agriculturist and, informed his nephew, namely, Yogesh Kumar Sahu (PW-10) to name Rupendra Hirwani (Sahu) that his (Tamradhwaj Sahu) father was assaulted by him with the aid of sword when enquired by the police as he wanted to take revenge against him. It, thus, appears that they are trying to implicate the respondents for the commission of alleged crime falsely and, no reliance, therefore, could be placed upon their testimonies in order to hold the respondents guilty. 10. In view of the aforesaid background, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment impugned passed by the trial Court in acquitting the 6 respondents from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 11. The appeal being devoid of merit, is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Judge sunita