1 2025:CGHC:13012-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 40 of 2016 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Jamul, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant versus Shivshankar Yadav, S/o Rajdev Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Sanjay Nagar, Supela, Police Station Supela, District: Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For State/Appellant : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Dy. G.A. For Respondent : Mr. Rishi Sahu, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate ACQA No. 78 of 2016 Kanhaiyalal Yadav, S/o Jay Karan Yadav, Aged About 56 Years, Occupation Milkman, R/o Ward No. 4, Gokul Nagar, Police Station- Jamul, Tahsil And District: Durg Chhattisgarh. ---Appellant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station House Jamul, District Durg Chhattisgarh. PRASHANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by PRASHANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.03.20 13:16:15 +0530 2 2 - Shiv Shankar Yadav, S/o Raj Dev Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Sanjay Nagar Supela, Police Station Supela, District Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Ashok Varma, Advocate For State/Respondent No.1 : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Dy. G.A. D.B:-Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal, Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board Per: Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 19/03/2025 1. Both these appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 09/10/2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Durg, District- Durg in Sessions Trial No.27/15 whereby, the respondent- Shiv Shankar Yadav has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 25 (1B) (b) read with Section 4 of Arms Act, 1959, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that, upon receiving the information regarding the commission of murder of deceased- Seema Yadav on 31/10/2014 from her mother- Smt. Girija Yadav, the Police Station- Jamul, District- Durg (C.G.) has registered a Dehati Nalasi (Ex. P/4) under Section 302 of IPC and, thereafter, a merg intimation (Ex.P/5) was registered and based upon which, an FIR (Ex.P/25) was registered on the same day, i.e. 31/10/2014 against an unknown person in connection with Crime No.382/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. 3. During trial, an apprehension was raised against the respondent 3 regarding his involvement in connection with the alleged crime. He was, therefore, arrested and based upon his disclosure statement (Ex.P/20), a knife with blood stained was recovered at his instance vide Ex.P/21 while, full paint and shirt were recovered from vide seizure memo (Ex.P/22). The articles, so recovered, were sent for chemical examination, where human blood was found to be depicted in the alleged knife vide FSL report (Ex.P/32). Inquest of the dead body was conducted vide Ex.P/2 and was sent for autopsy, which was conducted by Dr. P. Akhtar and Dr. Smt. Kalpana Sharma, who have submitted their report (Ex.P/11) while opining, the cause of death to be shocked occurred due to incised injury in neck associated with stab injury on inside chest and, after completing the usual investigation, the concerned Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg against the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and also under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and, the matter was, thereafter, committed to the learned Sessions Judge, Durg where the charges have been framed against him for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 449 of IPC and under Section 25 (1B) (b) read with Section 4 of the Arms Act, 1959 and, the charges so framed were denied by him and claimed to be tried. 4. In order to bring home the guilt of the said respondent, the prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 33 documents, while none was examined by the respondent in his defence. 5. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that since the alleged weapon 4 “knife” was not found to be recovered from the said respondent and in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence led by the prosecution, the said respondent has been acquitted from the commission of the alleged offence, as mentioned herein-above and, being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred by the father of the deceased. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant in both the appeals submits that the finding of the trial Court holding that the respondent is not the author of the alleged crime is, apparently, contrary to the materials available on record, in as much as, the evidence led by the prosecution, particularly, the FSL Report (Ex.P/32) showing the human blood in the alleged knife, which was recovered from the respondent, have not been scanned in its proper manner and, thereby, erred in acquitting him from the commission of the alleged crime. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/accused has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the trial Court. 8. From perusal of the record, it appears that the said respondent has been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 449 of IPC, along with Section 25 (1B) (b) read with Section 4 of the Arms Act, 1959. 9. It appears that, the Dehati Nalasi (Ex.P/4) was lodged by deceased’s mother, namely, Girija Yadav, where, it was alleged by her that she has seen some person running away after committing the murder of her daughter and during trial, suspicion was raised against him that since he was in love affair with her daughter, therefore, he might have involved in the commission of the alleged crime. 10. It, however, appears based upon the disclosure statement 5 (Ex.P/21) of the respondent that a knife was recovered vide Ex.P/21, while, full paint and shirt was recovered vide Ex.P/22 in presence of two witnesses, namely, Ramchandra Mourya and Anil Yadav. But, Ramchandra Mourya, who was examined as PW-9, has, however, failed to establish the alleged recovery, while, another attesting witnesses, namely, Anil Yadav, though was present in the Court, but was given up by the prosecution for the reasons best known to it. The alleged recovery has, thus, not found to be established by the prosecution, though, in FSL report, human blood was found in the alleged weapon “knife”, but in absence of its “blood group”, vis-a-vis non- establishment of the alleged recovery, it is, therefore, difficult to hold that he was involved in connection with the alleged crime. Apart from that, there is no material placed on record by the prosecution, so as to hold, that the respondent was involved in connection with the alleged crime and the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime. 11. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE JUDGE Prashant