1 2025:CGHC:32219-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No.171 of 2018 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG) ... Appellant/Prosecution versus 1 - Pilaram Sonkar S/o Late Kartik Ram Sonkar Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Rudgaon, Police Station Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, (CG) 2 - Smt. Godawari @ Kanti Sonkar W/o Pilaram Sonkar Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Rudgaon, Police Station Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, (CG) ... Respondents/Accused For Appellant : Shri Atanu Ghosh, Dy.GA For Respondent(s) : Ms. Durga Mehar, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, learned counsel DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 11/07/2025 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 04.09.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.46/2016, whereby, the respondents have been acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE 2 2) Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 27.01.2016, a written report (Ex.P-6) was lodged by the father of the injured-Uttam Kumar Sonkar before the Police Station-Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, alleging therein, that his son was badly assaulted by the Respondent No.1-Pilaram along with his wife-Smt. Godawari-the Respondent No.2 herein and thrown him from the roof of their house in the morning between 3.30 AM to 04 AM. It is alleged further that on account of the alleged injuries, his son-Uttam Kumar Sonkar, was admitted into Shri Ram Hospital at Rajnandgaon and thereafter, he was referred to the Government Hospital at Rajnandgaon on 19.01.2016 and was admitted there up to 24.01.2016 and because of his poor financial condition, he got him discharged from the said hospital on 25.01.2016. Based upon the alleged report, an FIR (Ex.P-7) was registered by the concerned Police Station against the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC in connection with Crime No.28/2016 and after completion of usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon against them with regard to the offence mentioned here-in-above and, the matter was thereafter committed to the concerned trial Court, where the charge was framed against the respondents under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, 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 12 witnesses and exhibited 15 documents, while two witnesses were examined by the respondents in their defence. 3 4) The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that since there is a gross disparity in the statement of the father of the injured (PW-5) as well as the letter written by him on 19.01.2016 at the time of discharging his son from the Government Hospital, Rajnandgaon, vis-a-vis, the statement of Dr. Satish Kumar Vasnik (PW-1), the respondents were, thus, held to be innocent and accordingly, they have been acquitted with regard to 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, particularly the statement of the father of the injured, namely, Kalaram Sonkar (PW-5) and his son-Uttam Kumar Sonkar (PW-7), have not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting the respondents 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 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, with regard to the incident occurred on 14.01.2016 in the morning around 03.30 AM to 04 AM, when Uttam 4 Kumar Sonkar-the injured was assaulted by the Respondent No.1- Pilaram, along with his wife-Smt. Godawari @ Kanti Sonkar, the Respondent No.2 herein. According to the prosecution, the alleged incident was reported by the father of the injured, namely, Kalaram Sonkar (PW-5) before the Police Station-Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon on 27.01.2016, wherein it was alleged by him that his son was assaulted badly by the respondents, owing to which, he sustained grievous injuries and was admitted into Shri Ram Hospital at Rajnandgaon, where he was treated up to 19.01.2016 and thereafter, he was referred to the Government Hospital, Rajnandgaon and was treated there up to 24.01.2016 and after that, he was referred to the hospital at Raipur. It appears from his testimony that he came to know about the alleged incident from his son-Uttam Kumar Sonkar, when he regained consciousness on 26.01.2016, and informed him that on the said fateful day, i.e. on 14.01.2016 in between 03.30 AM to 04 AM, when he was going for answering the call of nature, the respondents have dragged him towards the roof of their house, and assaulted him with the aid of stick and thereafter, thrown him from the roof, as a result of which, he became unconscious. Further testimony of him would reveal that his son was brought by the two persons, namely, Lalit and Punit and, according to the statement of Lalit (PW-6), it appears that he has seen the injured-Uttam Kumar Sonkar (PW-6) near the house of one Manoj Kumar, but the house of Manoj Kumar was not depicted in the Nazri Naksha, marked as Ex.P-8-A and, the other person, namely, Punit, was, however, not examined by the prosecution. 9) Uttam Kumar Sonkar, the injured, was examined as PW-7, who stated that the respondents have caught hold of him and took him to the roof 5 of their house, where he was assaulted by them with the aid of stick and thereafter, they thrown him from the roof, owing to which, he sustained grievous injuries and became unconscious, but, it reveals from his testimony that he was aware that he was admitted into Shri Ram Hospital at Rajnandgaon, on the date of the incident itself, i.e. on 14.01.2016. In view thereof, it cannot be said that he was unconscious on the date when he sustained the alleged injuries, as stated by his father (PW-5) in his evidence. 10) It is to be seen further that initially, he was examined by Dr. Satish Kumar Vasnik (PW-1) and a bare perusal of his testimony would reveal the fact that when the injured was treated by him, certain questions were put by him to the said injured, who in turn, stated that he himself fell down, when he was going to answer the call of nature and because of that, he sustained the alleged injuries. It appears further from his testimony that he got discharged from the said hospital on 19.01.2016 and, it reveals further from para-8 of his testimony, that he has not seen any kind of injury caused by the stick, as alleged by the father (PW-5) and his son-Uttam Kumar Sonkar, the injured (PW-7), nor the alleged stick was recovered from the respondents. It is, therefore, difficult to hold that the injured-Uttam Kumar Sonkar was assaulted by the respondents with the aid of stick. Although, it was stated by the father of the injured that he came to know regarding the alleged incident from his son, only on 26.01.2016, when he regained consciousness, but from a bare perusal of the statement of Dr. Satish Kumar Vasnik (PW-1), as observed herein-above, the injured was discharged from the hospital on 19.01.2016. 6 11) That apart, according to the written report (Ex.P-6) lodged by the father of the injured, he was admitted into the Government Medical College & Associated Hospital, Rajnandgaon on 19.01.2016 and was treated there up to 24.01.2016, but, a bare perusal of the “Discharge Ticket/ Summary” of the said hospital, marked as Ex.P-1, would reveal the fact that he was admitted there from 19.01.2016 up to 21.01.2016. Therefore, it cannot be said that he was treated there up to 24.01.2016 and was referred to the hospital at Raipur, as stated by the father of the injured. His statement, therefore, cannot be relied upon and, rather it appears that despite knowing the alleged incident, he lodged the report on 27.01.2016, that is with a delay of 12 days, without giving any proper explanation for it. 12) In view of such circumstances, the statement of the injured, which is not found to be corroborated by any cogent and reliable evidence, as observed herein-above, cannot be relied upon that on the said fateful day, he was assaulted by the respondents with the aid of stick and, the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting them from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 13) The appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. SD/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge SSD/- SD/-- /-d/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Tumane