1 2025:CGHC:14137-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2099 of 2024 1 - Santosh Das Mahant S/o Late, Sukhandi Das Mahant Aged About 58 Years R/o Baradwar, Police Station Baradwar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Vimal Das Mahant, S/o Santosh Das Mahant, Aged About 21 Years R/o Baradwar, Police Station Baradwar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Baradwar District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Prakant Sethi, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 24/03/2025 1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C) questioning the impugned judgment dated 19.09.2024 passed in Sessions Trial No. 2 47/2023 by which the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, has convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. 2. The appellants were charged for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC alleging that on 06.04.2023 at 7.15 p.m., in front of the house of Bheli Lohar and Jahar Patel at Basti, Baradwar, under Police Station Baradwar, District Sakti, in furtherance of their common intention, they had caused the intentional murder of the deceased Siddheshwar Patel by stabbing him in the stomach, chest, back and hand with a knife with the intention of killing him. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the informant Kalesh Patel (PW-1) lodged an oral report at the Baradwar Police Station to the effect that on 06.04.2023 at about 7:15 pm, he was going from home to Gajanand Chowk Vrinda Grocery shop to buy goods, at that time, in front of the house of Bheli Lohar and Jahar Patel, Siddheshwar Patel (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’), son of Chhatram Patel was coming At the same time, Appellant No. 1-Santosh Das Mahant came there and said to Siddheshwar Patel that he was harassing his daughter and saying this, they started assaulting with fists due to old enmity. At the same time, Vimaldas Mahant, son of Santosh Das Mahant-Appellant No. 2, came who had a knife in his hand, to which Santosh Das said that today they would kill the deceased, then appellant No. 2 stabbed him in the stomach, chest, back and hand with a knife, due to which the deceased got injured and his intestines came out. The deceased was 3 taken to District Hospital at Janjgir for treatment, from where he was taken to CIMS Bilaspur for treatment. On the basis of the above information, FIR No. 75/2023 was registered against the accused at Baradwar Police Station for the offences under Section 307, 34 IPC and investigation was started in the case. 4. During the investigation, blood stained soil, plain soil and the deceased's blood stained blue brown half jeans pant were seized from the crime scene and and on the basis of the memorandum statement of the appellants, the steel knife used in the crime was seized. The appellants were arrested after evidence of crime was found against them. Since the deceased died during treatment, further investigation was started in the case by adding section 302 IPC in the case. 5. During the investigation by the prosecution, the accused were found to be prima facie involved in the crime, and after investigation, final report was presented in the court of Acting Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sakti under Section 302, 34 IPC, from where, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. 6. Charges were framed against the appellants for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC to which the appellants denied and prayed for trial. 7. In order to bring home the offence, as many as 13 prosecution witnesses namely Kalesh Patel (PW-1), Takeshwar Lal Patel (PW-2), Om Prakash Yadav (PW-3), Chitrakumar (PW-4), Ramesh Kumar Patel (PW-5), Kaleshwar Prasad Gupta (PW-6), Bhishma Vishwakarma (PW-7), Naresh Kumar Porte (PW-8), M.L.Rathore (PW-9), Raj Kumar Sai (PW- 10), Dr. Akash Thawait (PW-11), Krishna Kumar Rathore (PW-12), and 4 Dr. Dharmendra Kumar (PW-13) were examined and as many as 32 Exhibits were exhibited. 8. The statement of the accused under section 313 CrPC was recorded wherein they stated that they were innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. In support of their case, the appellants exhibited the statements of Kalesh Patel (PW-1), Om Prakash (PW-3) and Ramesh Patel (PW-4) exhibited as Exhibit D/1, D/2, D/3 and D/4, respectively. 9. The learned trial Judge, after considering the evidence on record, convicted the appellant/convict as detailed in the opening paragraph. Hence, the present appeal by the appellants/convict. 10. Mr. Prakant Sethi, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned trial Court has erred by convicting and sentencing the appellants as aforesaid. The conviction is based on the statement of the near relatives of the deceased which cannot be given much weightage being the interested witnesses. There are omissions and contradictions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. As per the postmortem report, the injuries are not on the vital part of the body. Even as per the prosecution, the appellant-Santosh Das Mahant had assaulted the deceased only with hands and fists. The deceased did not die on the spot and died on the next day after 12 hours. There was no motive for the appellants to cause death of the deceased. Knife has been seized from the appellant-Vimal Das Mahant but still the appellant-Santosh Das Mahant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC. Hence, the appeal deserves to be allowed and the appellants be acquitted of the charges. 5 11. On the other hand, Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent submits that the appellants have brutally murdered the deceased with a knife after assaulting him with hands and fists and the weapon of assault has also been recovered and there was a motive also for the appellant to commit the crime. The judgment passed by the learned trial Court is based on cogent reasons. Above all, there are eye witness to the incident and as such, the judgment of conviction and sentence awarded by the learned trial Court is just and proper warranting no interference and as such, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 13. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature as is evident from the postmortem report (Exhibit P/31). The MLC report (Exhibit P/16) states that there were as many as 8 incised wounds. Dr. Akash Thawait (PW-11), on the basis of his report (Exhibit P/16) has deposed that on 06.04.2023 at 8.35 p.m. the deceased was brought before him by Police Constable No. 830 Neelam Singh of Janjgir Police Station for examination of his injuries. On examining the injuries of the said injured he found as many as eight incised wounds and the intestine had also come out. The condition of the patient was serious, BP was not recorded, pulse was 48 per minute. According to the said witness, the injured Siddheshwar Patel was referred to CIMS, Bilaspur in a serious condition. Dr. Akash Thawait (PW-11) has stated in his opinion that the injuries numbered 1 to 8 appear to have been caused by sharp hard objects and their nature can 6 be determined after the CT scan report of the abdomen. The time of injury to the victim appears to have been within three hours. 14. During the course of treatment at CIMS, the deceased expired. In the postmortem report, Dr. Dharmendra Kumar (PW-13) found as many as 7 stitch wound and one operated stitch wound of 23 c.m. having 14 stitches over abdominal horizontal, lacerated wound in the wrist 4x2x1/2 c.m. open wound and fracture in ribs left side of the chest. The Doctor had opined that the injuries were antemortem in nature and caused by hard and sharp object and the mode and nature of injuries were homicidal. The reason assigned for death was cardio-respiratory failure due to shock as a result of complications that arose out of those injuries which were homicidal in nature. This aspect has not been seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellants and as such, we agree with the findings recorded by the learned trial Court with regard to the nature of death being homicidal. 15. The question for consideration by this Court in this appeal would be whether on the basis of materials available on record, the appellants can be held guilty of the offence? 16. The case is based on eye witness account. Kalesh Patel (PW-1) is the cousin of the deceased. He stated that on the date of incident, he was going towards the grocery shop, he saw that the deceased was coming from the side of the shop and going towards his house at that time, near the house of Bheli, both the the appellant No. 1 accused the deceased of bothering her daughter assaulted the deceased with a lathi and the appellant No. 2 assaulted with a knife on the chest, abdomen and back. The intestine had come out of the stomach and after assaulting, both the appellants ran away. He was taken to Janjgir Hospital in a pickup and 7 from where he was referred to CIMS, Bilaspur, where he succumbed to the injuries. Takeshwar Lal (PW-2) deposed that the said day was the day of Hanuman Jayanti. He also saw both the appellants assaulting the deceased. He stated that because of the assault, blood was oozing out of the injuries and the clothes of the deceased were smeared with blood. He however admits that he had not seen the appellants causing injuries as they had fled from the spot when he reached the place of incident. Omprakash Yadav (PW-3) stated that he was alongwith the deceased at the time of incident near the grocery shop. He also stated that the appellant No. 1 came from back and caught hold of the of the deceased and asked the appellant No. 2 to assault the deceased upon which appellant No. 2 assaulted the deceased with a knife on his chest, abdomen and one of the veins of his hand was severed. He further informed that at the time of incident, Takeshwar and Kalesh were also present. It was also stated that the incident took place as there was some dispute between them with regard to bothering of their daughter by the deceased. Chitrakumar (PW-4) is the real brother of the deceased. He was informed by the deceased while he was at Janjgir Hospital that the appellants had caused injuries to him. Ramesh Kumar Patel is also the cousin of the deceased. On the date of incident, he was at home when her mother and Bhabhi came screaming that there has been a fight between the deceased and the appellant No. 2 upon which he came running to the spot where he saw that appellants were assaulting the deceased with knife and hands and fists. 17. Memorandum statement of the appellant No. 2 (Exhibit P/4) was recorded on 07.04.2023 at 10:45 hours wherein the appellant No. 2 informed that the deceased used to tease and bother his sister regarding which his father had warned the deceased but he did not stop bothering 8 her sister and started quarelling with his father upon which he became so angry that he came with a knife and gave blows on his chest, abdomen, and on the back and caused grievous injuries. He had hidden the knife in a room of his house which was later on recovered and seized vide Exhibit P/5. 18. The police had sent a query to the Dr. Dharmendra Kumar (PW-13), FMT, CIMS, Bilaspur, asking whether the injuries sustained by the deceased could have been caused by the seized weapon i.e. the knife to which it has been replied that the injuries could be caused with the said knife vide its report (Exhibit P/32). 19. In the FSL report (Exhibit P/30), blood has been found in Articles A, C, and D, which are the blood stained soil, jeans pant of the deceased and the knife seized from the appellant No. 2 and in Articles C and D, human blood has been found. 20. As the case is based on eye witness account, there remains no manner of doubt that it was the appellants who had assaulted the deceased with hands and fists and knife which was witnessed by Kalesh Patel (PW-1), and Om Prakash Yadav (PW-3). The appellants also had the motive as they had previous animosity as to allegedly, the deceased used to bother the daughter of the appellant No. 1 and sister of appellant No. 2 which was objected to by the appellants. The weapon of assault containing blood stains was recovered at the instance of the appellant No. 2 himself and the FSL report also confirms presence of human blood on the weapon of assault. Even during examination of the appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they have not stated nothing except to either state that they were having no knowledge or that the allegations were incorrect and that they have been falsely implicated. They have also not 9 given any suggestion as to why the prosecution witnesses would be deposing against them and why would they falsely implicate them. Even though the fatal injuries were caused by the appellant No. 2 with a knife, however, since both the appellants had the common intention to cause death of the deceased, even if the appellant No. 1 had not caused grievous injuries, he also has rightly been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, with the aid of Section 34 IPC. 21. From the above analysis, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been successful in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and the learned trial Court has not committed any legal or factual error in arriving at the finding with regard to the guilt of the appellants/ convicts. 22. Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 23. The appellants are stated to be in jail. They shall serve out the remaining part of the sentence as has been awarded to them by the learned trial Court. 24. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail sentences to serve the same on the appellants informing them that they are 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. 10 25. Let a certified copy of this judgment alongwith the original record be transmitted to trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and action, if any. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.03.28 14:24:30 +0530