1 2025:CGHC:15090-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No.142 of 2018 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Chhuikhadan Dist. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - Roopchand Joshi @ Panja, S/o Shri Dharamdas Joshi, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Dokrabhata, Police Station Chhuikhadan Dist. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2 - Jaggu @ Rashid Sahu, S/o Shri Sudhan Sahu, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Village Khairbana, Police Station Khairagarh, Dist. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) .. Respondent(s) For Appellant/State : Shri Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent(s) : Shri Ashesh Kumar and Ms. Komal Yadav, Advocates appears on behalf of Shri Mahesh Pandey, Advocate. DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 28/03/2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 31/08/2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG) in Sessions Trial No.15/2015, whereby, the respondents have been NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2025.04.01 12:24:35 +0530 2 acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. 2) Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 28/05/2015, the complainant-Bhagwan Das lodged a report before the Police Station Chhuikhadan, alleging therein, that on the said day in the evening around 07.30 PM, the respondents have assaulted the victim– Shishupal on his head with the aid of bamboo stick, owing to which, he sustained as many as three injuries. Based upon the alleged information, an FIR (Ex.P/9) was registered against the respondent No.1 Roopchand Joshi alone for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and during trial, the alleged bamboo stick was recovered from the spot vide Ex.P/1 on 28/05/2015 and was sent for the FSL report along with blood stained soil, where no human blood was found on the alleged stick. After completing the usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhuikhadan against the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of IPC and, the matter was thereafter committed to the learned trial Court, where the charge has been framed against the respondents with regard to the alleged offence, which was 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 9 witnesses and has exhibited 14 documents, while none was examined by the respondents in their defence. 4) The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, held that the respondents are not involved in connection with the alleged crime and accordingly, they have been acquitted from the 3 commission of the alleged offence 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, particularly the statement of the injured along with other eyewitness, namely, Ramesh Kumar (PW-3), Dhaneshwar (PW- 4) and Kesh Lal (PW-5), have 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, while inviting attention to the statement of the injured Shishupal, submits that since he has not seen, who assaulted him, nor any weapon, alleged to have been used for the commission of alleged crime, was recovered from them and, as the prosecution has failed to produce cogent and reliable evidence attributing the respondents for the commission of the alleged offence, the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondents from the alleged crime and, the appeal as framed deserves to be dismissed. 7) We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 8) The respondents have been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 307 read with Section 34 of IPC with regard to the incident occurred on 28/05/2015 in the evening around 07.30 PM. According to the prosecution, on the said fateful day, the victim- Shishupal was assaulted by the respondents with the aid of bamboo 4 stick, owing to which, he sustained injuries on his head. In order to establish the alleged allegations, the injured-Shishupal was examined as PW-7, but, a bare perusal of his statement would show that he has not seen, who assaulted him. That apart, the alleged stick was not found to be recovered from any of the respondents. Besides, Ramesh Kumar (PW-3), Dhaneshwar (PW-4) and Kesh Lal (PW-5), who are alleged to have been the eye-witnesses of the incident, have turned hostile, without supporting the prosecution story. The prosecution has, thus, failed to produce cogent and reliable evidence attributing the respondents from the commission of the alleged offence. 9) In view of above, the trial Court has not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondents 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 Kamde