Page No.1 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 2025:CGHC:11399-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No.1759 of 2019 [Arising out of judgment dated 29.08.2017, passed in Sessions Case No.03 of 2017 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Krishnapal Singh @ Bheekam Otti) by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur (CG)] Krishnapal Singh @ Bheekham Otti S/o Shri Amar Singh Otti Aged About 37 Years Caste Gond, R/o Badka Mohalla, Dhanpur, P. S. Pendra, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant (In Jail) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P. S. Pendra, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant : Ms. Sharmila Singhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Ashish Shukla, Add. Advocate General and Mr. Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (07.03.2025) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J (1) Invoking criminal appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the “CrPC”), the sole accused-appellant herein is calling in question SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2025.03.12 14:16:57 +0530 Page No.2 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 legality, validity and correctness of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.08.2017, passed in Sessions Case No.03 of 2017 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Krishnapal Singh @ Bheekam Otti) by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur (CG), whereby he have been convicted and sentenced as under: Conviction Sentence U/s. 302 of IPC (on two counts) [For causing murder of Lal Singh and Biran Singh] Imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 03 months on each count. U/s. 460 of IPC Imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.2,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 months. U/s. 325 of IPC [For causing grievous hurt to Nirasa Bai (PW- 01] Rigorous imprisonment for 07 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and, in default of payment of fine amount, additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month. [All the sentences are directed to run concurrently] (2) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 10.01.2016, at about 09:30 PM in the night, in the house of injured/complainant- Smt. Nirasha Bai (PW-01), situated at Village Dhanpur, which comes within the ambit of Police Station Pendra, District Bilasur (CG), the accused-appellant herein firstly illegally trespassed into the house of the complainant and, thereafter, with the intent to kill, assaulted her husband and son, namely, Lal Singh Page No.3 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 and Biran Singh (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased persons”) by means of wooden stick and spade, due to which, they suffered grievous injuries and died and, further, assaulted complainant- Smt. Nirasha Bai (PW-01), due to which, she suffered grievous injuries and, thereby, the appellant is said to have committed the aforesaid offences. (3) It is further case of the prosecution that when complainant- Smt. Nirasha Bai (PW-01) reported the matter to the police, FIR (Ex.P/01) was registered against the appellant and wheels of investigation started running, in which, summons under Section 175 of CrPC were sent vide Ex.P/03 & Ex.P/25 and inquest proceedings were also conducted vide Ex.P/04 & Ex.P/26. Merg intimations were registered Ex.P/02 & Ex.P/28. Najari naksha and panchnama were also prepared vide Ex.P/11 & Ex.P/12 respectively. The dead-bodies of the deceased persons were sent for postmortem examination and in the postmortem reports (Ex.P/06 & Ex.P/07), conducted by Dr. Hemant Tanwar (PW-07), it has been opined that the cause of death of the deceased persons is coma due to multiple injuries and excessive hemorrhage and nature of injuries is homicidal. Injured- Smt. Nirasha Bai (PW-01) was subjected to medical examination, which was conducted vide Ex.P/17 by Dr. Dilip Paikra (PW-11), wherein it has been opined that injury found over the body of the injured is simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object. The accused-appellant was arrested vide Ex.P/23. Page No.4 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 From the place of incident, one bamboo stick, one steel spade, broken pieces of bangles, blood-stained soil and plain soil were recovered vide Ex.P/05, where clothes of the deceased persons (baniyan, lungi and undergarment) were also seized vide Ex.P/15. The seized articles were sent for chemcial examination and, as per FSL report (Ex.P/29) it has been opined that stains of human blood were foun on the wooden stick, clothes of the deceased persons (baniyana and undergarment), where as stains of human blood having A group were found on the spade seized from the spot as also on the lungi of deceased- Lal Singh. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded and, after due investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the appellant in the competent court of criminal jurisdiction and, ultimately, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which the appellant/accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence by stating that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. (4) The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 29 documents, whereas the appellant/accused in support of his defence, has neither examined any witness nor exhibited any document. (5) The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, proceeded to convict the appellant for offences under Sections 302 (on two counts), 460 & Page No.5 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 325 of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellants-accused questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. (6) Ms. Sharmila Singhal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned trial Court is absolutely unjustified in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences, as the prosecution has failed to prove the same beyond reasonable doubt. She further submits there is no evidence available on record to connect the appellant herein with the offences in question. Nothing incriminating has been seized from the exculsive possession of the appellant. Even the weapon of the offences i.e. wooden stick and spade have been seized from the spot. Learned Senior Counsel vehemently argued that the case of the prosecution is totally based on the testimonies of four eye-witnesses. Even, the testimonies of eye-witnesses, namely, Nirasha Bai (PW-01) and Chandani (PW-08) are not reliable and trustworthy, as they are interested witnesses being close relative of the deceased persons. Furthermore, the testimonies of Prem Singh (PW-04) and Lekhan Singh (PW-06) are also not reliable, as they have not seen the incident of appellant assaulting the deceased persons. Therefore, the testimonies of all the aforesaid four eye-witnesses are liable to be discarded. Hence, the present appeal deserves to be allowed and the appellant is liable to be acquitted of the said charge on the basis of benefit of doubt. Page No.6 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 (7) Per-contra, learned State counsel supported the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and submits that the prosecution has proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt by leading evidence of clinching nature. In view of statements of prosecution witnesses, specially, injured eye-witness- Nirasha Bai (PW-01) and eyewitness- Chandani (PW-08), who are family members of the deceased person and were also present on the spot at the time of incident alongwith the appellant and the deceased persons, the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants for offences under Sections 302 & 201/34 of IPC and, therefore, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. (8) We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. (9) The first and foremost question is as to whether the death of the deceased persons was homicidal in nature, which the learned trial Court has recorded in affirmative by taking into consideration the postmortem reports (Ex.P/06 & Ex.P/07), wherein it has been opined that cause of death of the deceased persons is coma due to multiple injuries and excessive hemorrhage and nature of injuries is homicidal, which is duly proved by the statement of Dr. Hemant Tanwar (PW-07). Accordingly, taking into consideration the postmortem report (Ex.P/06 & Ex.P/07) and the statement of Dr. Hemant Tanwar (PW-07), who has conducted postmortem of the Page No.7 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 dead-body of the deceased persons, we are of the considered opinion that the death of the deceased persons was homicidal in nature, as the same is correct finding of fact based on evidence and same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. We hereby affirm the said finding. (10) Now the next question would be whether the appellant herein is the author of the crime or not ? (11) In the instant case, the case of the prosecution is totally based on direct evidence in the shape of testimonies of injured eye- witnesses- Nirasha Bai (PW-01) and other eye-witnesses- Chandani (PW-08), Prem Singh (PW-04) and Lekhan Singh (PW-06) and, their presence, on the date and time of the offence on the spot alongwith the appellant and the deceased persons are also not in dispute, therefore, we will scrutinize their testimonies carefully one by one. (12) Nirasha Bai (PW-01), who is wife of deceased- Lal Singh and mother of deceased- Biran Singh. Nirasha Bai (PW-01) in her statement before the Court has clearly stated that: on the date of offence while she alongwith her grand-daughter, namely, Chandani (PW-08) were sleeping in one room and, his son- Biran Singh (deceased) was sleeping in the kitchen of the house alongwith his wife, in the night at about 09-10 PM, the appellant, who is her neighbour, entered from the back side of the house and starting quarreling and abusing her (Nirasha Bai), upon which, her son- Biran Singh (deceased) came and asked the appellant not to quarrel Page No.8 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 and abuse, upon which, the appellant assaulted deceased- Biran Singh by means of spade and wooden stick (which he was carrying with him) on his head, due to which, deceased- Biran Singh suffered grievous injuries and fell down on the ground; thereafter, when Nirasha Bai (PW-01) tried to intervene, the appellant also assaulted her by means of spade and wooden stick on her hands, due to which, she suffered grievous injuries on her hand; thereafter, when deceased- Lal Singh (husband of Nirasha Bai) tried to intervene, the appellant further assaulted him by means of spade and wooden stick, due to which, deceased- Lal Singh suffered grievous injuries and died on the spot and, thereafter, the appellant absconded from the spot. Later on, during the course of treatment in the hospital, on 11.01.2016, at about 03:25 AM, deceased- Biran Singh also succumbed to the injuries and died. Thereafter, Nirasha Bai (PW-01) reported the matter to the police. Nirasha Bai (PW-01) was subjected to lengthy cross-examination on behalf of the defence, but nothing could be extracted from her to hold that she has not seen the incident of appellant assaulting her as also the deceased persons. As such, we see no good ground to disbelieve the testimony of Nirasha Bai (PW-01), more particularly, when the factum of Nirasha Bai (PW-01) suffered injuries on her hand, is duly supported by her MLC report (Ex.P/17), which is proved by the statement of Dr. Deep Paikra (PW-11). Consequently, the testimony of Nirasha Bai (PW-01) being injured eye-witness to the incident inspire confidence and can Page No.9 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 be relied upon to hold the appellant guilty of the offence in question. (13) Chandani (PW-08), who is daughter of deceased- Biran Singh and grand-daughter of deceased- Lal Singh. Chandani (PW-08) has reiterated the version made by Nirasha Bai (PW-01) before the Court by stating that all of sudden, on the date of offence, while the appellant was abusing in her house, her father- Biran Singh (deceased) asked him not to abuse, upon which, the appellant assaulted him by means of spade, due to which, Biran Singh (deceased) suffered injuries and fell down on the ground; thereafter, when her grand-father- Lal Singh (deceased) tried to intervene, the appellant also assaulted him, due to which he died. Chandani (PW- 08) has also stated that in the said incident, after the appellant absconded from the spot, as his father- Biran Singh was alive, he was escorted to the hospital, but he succumbed to the injuries in the hospital and died, whereas her grand-father- Lal Singh died on the spot. Chandani has been subjected to some length of cross- examination, but nothing could be extracted from her to hold that she has not seen the incident or she is falsely implicating the appellant. Further, during her cross-examination, the only suggestion which has been made to her that there was no light available on the place of incident, to which, though she accepted that there was no light on the spot at the time of incident, but she witnessed the incident in the light of torch. She also refuted the fact that there was a dispute between her father and grand-father and Page No.10 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 they assaulted each other under the influence of liquor. As such, we also see no good ground to disbelieve the testimony of Chandani (PW-08) and, therefore, her testimony of being eye-witness to the incident inspires confidence and can be relied upon to hold the appellant guilty of the offence in question. (14) Not only Nirasha Bai (PW-01) and Chandani (PW-08), but Prem Singh (PW-04, who is co-villager and reside near the house of the appellant and the deceased persons, has also stated before the Court that on the date of offence while he was sleeping he heard the sound of quarrel and ‘marpeet’ from the house of the deceased persons, then he came out and by spotting the torch light on the appellant asked him not to assault the deceased persons, upon which, the threatened him and, thereafter, he visited the house of Sarpanch and informed the incident, who in turn, informed the matter to the police. Prem Singh (PW-04) has also stated that when he alongwith the Sarpanch of the village visited the house of the deceased persons (place of incident), they saw that the deceased persons were lying on the ground in injured condition and blood was oozing out from their body and, thereafter, the ambulance came and took deceased- Biran Singh to the hospital for treatment and deceased- Lal Singh died on the spot. Prem Singh (PW-04) was also subjected to cross-examination, but he remained consistent in her version and supported the case of the prosecution. Similar in the statement made by Lekhan Singh (PW-06). Page No.11 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 (15) As such, from the testimonies of Nirasha Bai (PW-01) and Chandani (PW-08), duly supported by Prem Singh (PW-04) and Lekhan Singh (PW-06), it is quite evident that it is only and only the present appellant who on the date of the offence, entered into the house of the complainant/injured- Nirasha Bai (PW-01), started abusing and qurelling, upon which, when deceased persons- Biran Singh and Lal Singh including injured- Nirasha Bai (PW-01) tried to intervene and asked him not to quarrel and abuse, the appellant assaulted them by means of spade and wooden stick, due to which, Nirasha Bai (PW-01) suffered injuries on her hand, deceased- Lal Singh suffered grievous injuries and died on the spot, whereas deceased- Biran Singh also suffered grievous injuries, but died later on during the course of treatment in the hospital. Moreover, as per query report (Ex.P/10), Dr. Hemant Tanwar (PW-10), opined that the injuries found over the body of the decesaed persons could be caused by the spade and wooden stick, seized from the spot vide Ex.P/05. Though, the said weapons (spade and wooden stick) were seized from the spot, but fact remains that according to FSL report (Ex.P29), stains of human blood having A group was found on the spade and stains of human blood were found on the wooden stick. Therefore, considering the aforesaid evidence available on record, we are of the considered opinion that the learned trial Court is absolutely justified in convicting the appellant herein for the offences under Section 302 (two counts), 460 & 325 of IPC. We do Page No.12 of 12 IN CRA-1759-2019 not find any good ground to interfere in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court while convicting and sentencing the appellant for the aforesaid offences in question. Accordingly, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court dated 29.08.2017 is hereby affirmed being well-merited. (16) Consequently, this criminal appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost. (17) The Registry of this Court is directed to sent a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is languishing, informing him that he is at liberty to assail this judgment before Hon’ble Supreme Court by preferring an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India with the aid and assistance of the Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee or that of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Judge s@if