1 2025:CGHC:28100-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1337 of 2024 Shankar Kumar Paswan S/o Munari Paswan Aged About 32 Years R/o Sakin Bara Chhatarpur, Police Station - Chhatarpur, District Palamu (Jharkhand), Presently Residing - Patrapali, Rented House Of Teklal Patel, Police Station Kotra Road, District Raigarh (C.G.) Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Kotra Road, District Raigarh (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shivang Dubey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, GA Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru, J 26/06/2025 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09/05/2024 passed by learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 13/2020, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 & 201 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- & sentenced to RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.06.27 18:12:17 +0530 2 undergo RI for 07 years with fine of Rs. 1000/-, respectively, with default stipulations. 2. Facts of the case are that Complainant- Mithlesh Singh who works as a labour supplier contractor in Nav Durga Fuel Private Limited, Saraipali Gharghoda. His brother-in-law Sandeep Singh (henceforth ‘the Deceased’) lives with his wife Sandhya in a house opposite Bhagwanpur Maruti Showroom. The Deceased used to work as a labour supply contractor in the DRI section of JSPL. On 19/10/2019 at about 00:45 pm, wife of the Deceased namely Sandhya Singh spoke to her sister-in- law Poonam Singh on her mobile and told her that the Deceased has gone for duty since 7.30 pm, however, did not return yet. Then he went to the house of the Deceased. Subsequently, he went to Kirori Mal Nagar to search the deceased, but he was not traceable. Thereafter, all of them together searched for the Deceased and also informed the police station. On the next day, at around 8 am, they came to know that a dead body of a person was lying near the embankment of Man Sarovar lake in front of Jindal School. The dead body’s head and the part below the waist were missing. When he went to see, he saw a dead body of a person without a head and the part below the waist. His intestines were protruding out of his stomach, he was wearing a yellow coloured T-shirt which was soaked in blood, he had a ring on three fingers of his right hand which identified him as the body of his brother-in-law Sandeep Singh (the Deceased). The Deceased was murdered by some unknown person at night by cutting his neck and upper part of the waist with a sharp weapon and the body parts were hidden. When the Complainant reported this incident in 3 Police Station-Kotra Road, District-Raigarh (CG), the case was registered and investigation was taken up. During investigation, the accused was arrested on finding evidence of committing the crime under Section-302 and 201 IPC. The memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded vide Ex.P/29, wherein it was revealed that since the Deceased had been consistently forcing him to do unnatural sex, therefore, he was frustrated and annoyed and as such, committed murder of the Deceased. Statement of witnesses of memorandum namely Prafull Singh Kanwar (PW9) and Akhilesh Sindhe (PW13) were recorded. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant under Sections 302 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code. After framing of the charges, the same was read over to the appellant, which he denied and claimed to be tried. 3. In order to bring home charge, the prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 56 documents (Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/56). After closing prosecution evidence, statement of the appellant under section 313 CrPC, thereby putting incriminating material against him, were recorded, to which he denied and pleaded false implication. In his support, one defence witness namely Shankar Kumar Paswan has been examined as DW1 4. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in opening paragraph of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 4 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant, without there being any evidence against him, has been roped into a false case. He would submit that there is no eye-witness in the present case. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence and it is incumbent upon the prosecution to complete the chain to prove the guilt of the accused, but in this case, the chain is not complete. He would submit that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove that the appellant had exclusive access to the place where the parts of the dead body was found. He would submits that there are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. According to the learned counsel, the prosecution has utterly failed to adduce any evidence to establish the fact that the appellant was residing in the same house, where the incident took place. The prosecution also failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubts by placing clinching and cogent evidence against the accused. Therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is not sustainable and the same deserves to be set-aide. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are sufficient evidence available on record to hold that the appellant guilty for the alleged offence and the learned trial Court has absolutely justified in passing the judgment of conviction and sentence against the appellants and the appeal filed by the appellants is liable to be dismissed. 5 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Admittedly, there is no eye-witness to the incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. 9. The first question for consideration would be, whether death of deceased was homicidal in nature ? 10. The trial Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record particularly relying upon the statement of Dr. Deepak Prakash (PW17) who has conducted postmortem and while examining he has found following injuries:- “External Examination: Clothes: Dead body wrapped in grey blue coloured hard plastic. Deceased was wearing light colour half t-shirt and white baniyan. Dried blood stains are present throughout the clothes (A) T-shirt: Three cut marks are present. 1. Size 2.5cm, vertically placed on front of lower part of 'V' shaped strip (left) of t-shirt. 2. Size 3.0 cm, vertically placed on front of left side of t- shirt (near lateral border), 18 cm above the lower part of t- shirt. 3. Size 1.8cm, obliquely placed on front of of t-shirt (middle area), 16 cm above the lower part of t-shirt (B) Baniyan: Two cut marks of size 1.5 cm and 1.0 cm are present on front of left side of baniyan near to lateral border area. Body: -A transected body part ((from trunk to abdomen) with both upper limbs of length of 49 cm. Dried blood stains are present 6 over the root of neck region and body at places. Postmorten: changes: - Postmortem lividity are present over back and not fixed. No signs of decomposition present External Injuries: - 1. Stab wounds (wedge shaped) of size 2.0 x 0.7 cm x cavity deep, obliquely placed is present over right side of abdomen (epigastric region), which is present 2.5 cm lateral to midline. The margin of the wound is clean cut (lower end was acute). The wound is directed downwards, backwards and towards left and cutting the skin, subcutaneous tissue, underlying muscle, peritoneal cavity and stomach. The whole track of the wound was blood stained. About 750 ml clotted blood is present in abdominal cavity. 2. Stab wound of size 2.0x0.9cm x cavity deep, obliquely placed over left side abdomen, which is present 13 cm lateral to umbilicus. The margin of the wound were clean cut (medial end of wound is irregular and lateral end is acute). The wound was directed downwards, backwards and medially cutting the skin, subcutaneous tissue, underlying muscle and penetrating to the peritoneal cavity and cutting the mesenteric vessel and intestine. The whole track of the wound was blood stained. 3. Stab wound of size 1 x 0.5 x muscle deep, obliquely placed is present over the lateral aspect lower part of left side of chest wall, 17 cm from midline. The margin of the wound is clean cut. 4. Stab wounds of size 1.7 x 0.7 cm x muscle deep, obliquely 7 placed is present over lower part of left side of chest wall which is present 2.5 cm lateral to midline. The margin of the wound is clean cut (lateral end is acute). 5. Three linear reddish abrasion of size 5 cm, 3.5 cm and 3 cm are present over left side of abdomen region (above the injury no.) 6. Incised wound of size 5.7 x 1.3cm x muscle deep, vertically placed is present over the lateral aspect of left arm, 17 cm from tip of shoulder. Edges of wound are clean cut along with the underlying muscles. 7. At the the neck region, head is transected at C 6 level, Hematoma is present in subcutaneous tissues and muscles in patches in wound region. Margins of the wounds are irregular (post-mortem in nature). Cause of death:- Cause of death in this is haemorrhagic shock as a result of stab injury to abdomen, caused by sharp edged pointed weapon. Injury no. 1 and 2 are individually and collectively sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All injuries are ante mortem in nature. External injury no. 7 is postmortem in nature and caused by sharp (serrated) edged weapon. Manner of death is homicidal. However viscera have been preserved to rule out any concomitant intoxication at the time of death. Time since death- About one and half day. Body preserved in cold storage prior to autopsy. 11. Thus, the finding recorded by the trial Court that the death of deceased 8 was homicidal in nature, is the finding of fact based on evidence available on record. It is neither perverse nor contrary to record. We hereby affirm that finding. 12. The next question arises for consideration whether the appellant had committed the murder of the Deceased or not? 13. Mithlesh Singh (PW1) has stated in his examination-in-chief that the deceased's wife Sandhya called his wife's mobile and told her that the Deceased has gone to duty and has not returned. The deceased's wife told that he went to duty at 7.30 pm and she had talk with him at 9.30 pm. The deceased's wife told that the Deceased had told that he was getting a shave at the salon. The deceased's wife also told that she had called the deceased repeatedly, but his mobile phone was switched off. Subsequently, he along with his wife went to the house of the deceased and put the deceased's wife and child in the car and went to Kirodimal Nagar, Patrapali and searched for Deceased. After searching, the deceased was not found. Subsequently, on the morning of 19-10-2019, a call came from Kotra Road Police Station that an unidentified dead body packed in a plastic bag was found near Jindal Mansarovar pond, whose head and the part below the waist were missing. He reached to the spot and saw that the body had a hand and a ring on the fingers and was wearing a yellow coloured T-shirt and was soaked in blood. He identified the deceased as Sandeep Singh by seeing the ring and the T- shirt. 14. Ex.P/25 is the Recovery (बरामदगी) Panchnama of head of the Deceased prepared on 21/10/2019. It was prepared by Rupak Sharma (PW16). 9 The witnesses of the said Panchnama are Prafull Singh Kanwar (PW9) and Akhilesh Shinde (PW13). Reading of the same would show that the appellant has stated before the witnesses that after cutting the body of the Deceased by the blade/cutter, the head of the deceased body which was wrapped in a plastic polythene, was thrown into an empty water tank of Deepakhol hill near Kharsiya Road, which was recovered. Ex.P/26 is the Recovery (बरामदगी) Panchnama of lower part below waist of the Deceased prepared on 21/10/2019. The witnesses of the said Panchnama are Prafull Singh Kanwar (PW9) and Akhilesh Shinde (PW13). Reading of the same would show that the appellant has stated before the witnesses that after cutting the body of the Deceased in three pieces, the below waist part of the body of the deceased, which was wrapped in a plastic gunny bag was thrown at Mansarovar pond, which was seized at his instance. On 21.10.2019, during the investigation at 17.50 hrs., from the roof of the dilapidated house of Teklal Patel, the weapons used in the incident, one pair of scissors, two pieces of iron saw, one knife with a broken blade, one iron knife, two pieces of old disposable hand gloves were recovered in front of witnesses Vide Ex.P.- 27. Further, behind Ramnath Oraon Complex in Patrapali, one cloth blanket, two old disposable cushions, one old disposable plastic mat, one piece of plastic mat which was soaked in blood were recovered vide recovery Panchnama Ex.P/28 . 15. The place of recovery though was open place but were Tipakhol hill near Kharsiya Road, Mansarovar pond, and dilapidated house of Teklal Patel. So it is highly improbable that ordinary people would be able to recover 10 such articles without any disclosure. 16. Prafull Singh Kanwar is a witness of memorandum and seizure and has been examined as PW9. He has deposed that on 21.10.2019, near Tipakhol hill, as per the information given by the accused, a site map was prepared in his presence (Ex.P./14). He further stated that on the memorandum statement of the appellant, the torso of the deceased, which was buried under the pipe, the head of the deceased wrapped in a foil in a tanker, the leg part of the deceased were seized at the instance of the appellant. He further stated that the police had seized saw and other weapons in his presence. 17. Similarly, Akhilesh Shinde (PW13), who is a memorandum and seizure witness, also stated that the memorandum was made before him. Thereafter, panchnama of the spot was prepared vide Ex.P/14. Further, at the instance of the appellant, the head, the torse and the weapons used in the incident were seized in his presence. 18. The DNA report conducted in respect of the Deceased is (Ex.P/49. Radius bone has been marked as A (1392), Teeth marked as B (1393) and the Femer Bone marked as C (1394). After due examination of the DNA, it reveals that all the above parts are belong to same person. Even, from the FSL report (Ex.P/50) , it is evident that on Article B1 and B2 i.e. T-shirt and Sando of the Deceased, respectively and on Article-E i.e. Hands gloves of the appellant, human blood contains. 19. Looking to the entire evidence available on record and the circumstances conclusively proves that the said criminal homicide death of deceased has been committed by the appellant and the crime of destruction of 11 evidence by cutting the head and the part from waist to feet of the dead body of deceased into pieces and throwing them at various places with the intention of destroying the evidence of murder is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant. As such, we do not find any illegality in the order and judgment passed by the trial Court and therefore, we affirm the same. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. 20. It is stated that the appellant is in jail, he shall serve out the remaining sentence. 21. Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record of the case to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance and also send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail sentence to serve the same on the appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 22. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted forthwith to the trial Court for information and necessary action. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Gowri/Rahul