1 2025:CGHC:6463-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2199 of 2023 Gunnu Das Panika S/o Chamru Das Aged About 25 Years R/o Feku Dafai, Near Court, Godripara, PS Chirimiri, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) (In Jail) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Aarakshi Kendra Chirimiri, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 05 .02.2025 1. Heard Mr. Shishir Dixit, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent/State. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.02.13 14:33:45 +0530 2 2. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.02.2023, passed by the learned Special Court, Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) in Special Cri. Case No. 10 of 2020, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: Conviction under Section Sentence Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’) Rigorous imprisonment (for short, ‘R.I.’) for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 month Simple imprisonment (for short, ‘S.I.’) more. Section 376/511 of the IPC R.I. for 05 years and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 month S.I. more. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17.01.2020, the complainant, namely, Bindeshwar Prasad (PW-6) gave merg intimation (Ex.P/30) in the Police Station Chirmiri stating that when he came out of the house at around 8.30 a.m. he saw resident of his village i.e. deceased lying naked near a bush, dead with head injuries and bleeding. On the aforesaid intimation, Assistant Sub Inspector, Lawang Singh (PW-10) registered Dehati Merg Intimation No. 0 of 2020 vide Ex.P/12. During investigation, nazri naksha of the place of incident was prepared, dead body panchnama was prepared and sent for postmortem examination. In the postmortem report, the autopsy surgeon opined the nature of death 3 was homicidal and on that basis the Police Station, Chirmiri registered First Information Report (FIR) (Ex.P/31) vide Crime No. 22 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. During course of investigation, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, memorandum statement (Ex.P/1) of the accused was recorded in which he has stated about the incident that on 16.01.2020 at night around 10-11 p.m. he was going towards Feku Dafai Road, when the deceased was found coming. The accused with the intention to rape her, threw her on the roadside, due to which the deceased started bleeding due to an injury on her head. When the accused was trying to rape her forcibly, the deceased said that she will go home and tell her boys, on which the accused picked up a stone and threw it on the head of the deceased due to which she died and the dead body was thrown in the bushes. 4. During the investigation, plain soil, small blood-stained stones, and a stone used in the crime were seized from the crime scene based on the indication of the accused. The clothes of the accused jeans, shirt and clothes of the deceased, saree, petticoat, sweater, gamchha, and slippers were seized. The deceased’s ration card, Aadhaar card, and councilor certificate were also seized. The seized properties were sent for chemical examination, and an FSL report was obtained. 5. As per medical evidence propounded by Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5) the cause of death of the deceased was shock and hemorrhage due to head injury and death is homicidal in nature, through its report (Ex.P/8). In the query report (Ex.P/10) also Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5) clearly deposed that the injury sustained by the deceased could have been inflicted from the seized stone. The FSL report (Ex.P/24) confirms the human blood on the 4 seized articles. Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5) through its report (Ex.P/11) also opined that the accused was capable for performing sexual intercouse. The FSL report, proves the presence of spermatozoa on the slides and undergarments of the accused. 6. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 376, 511 of the IPC and Section 3(2-5) (2V-Ka) of the Atrocities Act before the jurisdictional criminal Court for hearing and disposal in accordance with law. 7. The trial Court has framed charges against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302, 376/511 & 3(2)(v) of the IPC and section 3(2-5) of the Atrocities Act and proceeded on trial. The appellant abjured the guilt and entered into defence stating that he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated. 8. The prosecution in order to bring home the offence examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 35 documents. The appellant has not examined any witnesses in his support. 9. The trial Court after completion of trial and after appreciating oral and documentary evidences available on record, by the impugned judgment dated 14.02.2023 convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner mentioned in the paragraph 02 of this judgment, against which this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by him calling in question the impugned judgment. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that 5 conviction of the appellant is substantially based on the circumstantial evidence, without there being any eye witness, though the chain of circumstances are missing and not completed to each other. None of the witnesses have supported the case of prosecution. He also submits that the evidences adduced on behalf of the prosecution is suspicious in nature and same is not safe for placing reliance, therefore, the appellant is entitled for benefit of doubt. 11. On the other hand, learned State counsel supports the impugned judgment and submits that there is ample evidence on record to connect the accused/appellant with the offence in question. The learned trial Court, after proper appreciation of the evidence and materials available on record, has convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused, which warrants no interference, and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the original records of the trial Court with utmost circumspection and carefully as well. 13. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, we have to examine the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. 14. The first question for consideration would be, whether the trial Court was justified in holding that death of deceased was homicidal in nature ? 15. The trial Court, relying upon the statement of Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW- 5), who has conducted postmortem on the body of deceased vide Ex.P/8, has clearly come to the conclusion that the cause of death of the 6 deceased was shock and hemorrhage due to head injury and the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature. The said finding recorded by the trial Court is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to record. Even otherwise, it has not been seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant. We hereby afÏrm the said finding. 16. As regards complicity of the appellant in crime in question, conviction of the appellant is substantially based on the evidence of Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5). 17. Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5), who conducted postmortem vide Ex.P/8 and he opined that cause of death of the deceased was shock and hemorrhage due to head injury and the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature. 18. Rajeshwar Singh @ Appu (PW-1), has stated in deposition that on 17.01.2020, his brother Rajkumar informed him that their mother had been murdered. They immediately rushed to the crime scene at Purana Godripara Feku Dafai, where they found a crowd and Police personnel. Their mother's naked body lying on the hilltop with injuries, and her head crushed with a stone. The body had scratch marks, and it seems to have been dragged up the hill. Nearby, they found their mother's clothes, keys, and slippers, along with a blue-black gamchha (scarf) belonging to their mother and a black-white checked gamchha belonging to the accused. A stone with bloodstains was found near the clothes. 19. Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2), has stated in his deposition that on 17.01.2020, Vijendra informed him about deceased’s naked body found 7 near Feku Basti. Upon arrival, he saw a crowd and Police personnel. Deceased’s clothes, including a sari, petticoat, blouse, gamchha, and slippers, lying on the roadside. A local resident, Golu, identified the gamchha as belonging to the accused, Gunnu Das, which he had seen in Gunnu's hand on the previous night. 20. Khushbu Das (PW-3), has stated in her deposition that about a year ago, she discovered a pile of clothes, including a sari, petticoat, sweater, jeans, and undergarments, near a drain in Feku Dafai. The clothes belonged to deceased. People nearby identified a gamchha as belonging to the accused, Gunnu Das. Deceased’s naked body lying in the bushes, her head injured and crushed. 21. Investigating OfÏcer, Lawang Singh (PW-10), has stated in his deposition that on 18.01.2020, he interrogated accused Gunnu Das in the presence of witnesses Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2) and Virendra Kumar. Gunnu Das revealed that he had thrown the stone used in the crime near a drain under the bushes and had washed the clothes he wore during the crime near his house. Statement of Gunnu Das, marked as Ex.P/1, bears his signature. Based on his statement, the Police recovered a bloodstained stone weighing 10 kg 250 gm, marked as Ex.P/3, and clothes, including a jeans pant, T-shirt, undergarments, and a shirt with bloodstains, marked as Ex.P/2. Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2) corroborated Lawang Singh’s testimony, stating that he witnessed Gunnu Das reveal the location of the stone and clothes. Gunnu Das initially misled the Police, but later, confessed to the crime stating that he had used the stone to kill the deceased. The witness identified the recovered items, including the stone and clothes, which were seized by the Police and documented in 8 the seizure memo, Exs.P/2 and P/3. 22. The testimony of Investigating OfÏcer Lawang Singh (PW-10) is corroborated by the independent witness Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2). Hence, the statement of the accused, as recorded in Ex.P/1, is proved through the seizure of evidence, Exs.P/2 and P/3. This circumstantial evidence reveals that on 18.01.2020, a day after the body of the victim was discovered, the Police interrogated the accused, who then made a statement in the presence of Rahul Bhai Patel and Virendra Singh, leading to the recovery of the bloodstained stone, jeans pant, T-shirt, undergarments, and shirt with bloodstains from the crime scene. 23. Now, the question is, whether the prosecution has discharged its initial or general burden or primary duty of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt? 24. In this regard, the trial Court observed that the FSL report (Ex.P/24) reveals that human blood was detected on stone-A, saree-C, petticoat-D, stone-J, pant-K, T-shirt-L, shirt-N, and blouse-O. Specifically, saree-C, stone-J, pant-K, and T-shirt-L had ‘AB’ group blood. However, the prosecution has not provided evidence regarding the blood group of the deceased. Consequently, it is not proven that the ‘AB’ group blood found on these items belonged to the deceased. Despite these, circumstantial evidence suggests that human blood was present on the seized items. From the discussion as above, it can be inferred that the blood found on these items likely belonged to the deceased. In this case, it is also established through circumstantial evidence that a gamchha was found at the crime scene. A crucial fact is whether the gamchha belonged to the 9 accused. Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2) testified that Golu, a local resident, was present at the crime scene and stated that the gamchha belonged to the accused, Gunnu Das, which he had seen in Gunnu's hands in the previous night. Similarly, Rajeshwar Singh @ Appu (PW-1) and Smt. Khusbhu Das (PW-3) testified that the people present at the crime scene stated that the gamchha belonged to the accused, Gunnu Das. Rajeshwar Singh @ Appu (PW-1) further testified that on 17.01.2020, the Police brought a sniffer dog to the crime scene, which sniffed the alleged gamchha and then went to the house of the accused, leading to his arrest and confession. This evidence remains unchallenged during cross- examination. The circumstantial evidence proves that the gamchha belonged to the accused, as identified by Golu, a local resident. Although the prosecution did not examine Golu, the hearsay evidence provided by Rahul Bhai Patel (PW-2), Rajeshwar Singh @ Appu (PW-1), and Smt. Khushbu Das (PW-3) cannot be disbelieved. 25. Regarding the motive of the accused for the murder, there is no direct evidence. However, based on the memorandum statement (Ex.P/1) of the accused, it is clear that he found the deceased alone at 10-11 p.m. and attempted to rape her. When she threatened to inform her sons, he killed her by hitting on her head with a stone. This is confirmed by the FSL report (Ex.P/25), which found semen stains and human sperm on the undergarment ‘M’ of the accused, vaginal swab ‘R’, vaginal slide ‘S’, and semen slide ‘T’. On the basis of all the above circumstances and the statements of the witnesses to the incident etc., it is established beyond doubt that the offence has been committed by the accused. 26. Considering the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the 10 findings recorded by the trial Court in its judgment, and the fact that after investigating the evidence, this Court finds that a bloodstained stone (weighing 10 kg 250 grams) was recovered and seized from the crime scene at the behest of accused. Dr. J.K. Yadav (PW-5) did not rule out the possibility of death due to the accused hitting the deceased on the head with the stone. The postmortem report confirms that death of the deceased was homicidal in nature. A bloodstained shirt was seized from the accused's possession. The FSL report (Ex.P/24) proves that human blood was present on the stone and shirt. The gamchha of the accused was found at the crime scene. Semen stains and human sperm were detected on the semen slide of the accused and the vaginal swab and vaginal slide of the deceased. Hence, circumstantial evidence proves that the accused attempted to rape the deceased and killed her when she threatened to inform her sons. The accused has not offered any explanation under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., and therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has rightly convicted the accused/appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 376/511 of the IPC. Thus, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the findings recorded by the trial Court. 27. For the foregoing reasons, the criminal appeal being devoid of merit and is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 28. It is stated at the Bar that the appellant is in jail, he shall serve out the sentence as ordered by the learned trial Court. 29. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the 11 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. 30. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan