1 2025:CGHC:54338-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Judgment reserved on 27/10/2025 Judgment pronounced on 07/11/2025 CRA No. 595 of 2020 1. Tameshwar Verma S/o Late Ramkumar Verma, Aged About 24 Years, 2. Visharam Verma S/o Pyari Verma, Aged About 28 Years, Both are R/o Village Bazaar Atariya, P.S. Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). ... Appellants versus • State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Khairagarh, Crime No.193/2017, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). --- Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Yogendra Chaturvedi, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Dy. Government Advocate AND ACQA No. 207 of 2020 • The State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). ...Appellant versus 1. Smt. Ashomati Janghel S/o Vishram Verma, Aged About 26 Years, 2. Smt. Yamini Verma W/o Tameshwar Verma, Aged About 23 Years, 3. Smt. Neera Bai @ Bhairi W/o Late Ram Kumar Verma, SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.11.07 14:27:54 +0530 2 All are R/o Village Bazar Atariya, Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 4. Balmukund Verma S/o Nanhu Verma, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Village Achholi, Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 5. Setram Verma S/o Munshi Verma, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Village Bori, Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). --- Respondents For Appellant/State : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Dy. Government Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Yogendra Chaturvedi, Advocate DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal CAV Judgment Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 1. Since both these appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 12/02/2020, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.21/2017, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In CRA No.595/2020, the appellants- Tameshwar Verma (A-1) and Visharam Verma (A-2) have been convicted and sentenced as under :- Conviction Sentence Under Section 302/34 of IPC R.I. for life and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months (each) 3. In ACQA No.207/2020, the respondents, namely, Smt. Neera Bai @ Bhairi, Smt. Yamini Verma and Smt. Ashomati Janghel have been acquitted from the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307/149 of IPC, while the other respondents, namely, Balmukund Verma and Setram Verma under 3 Sections 147, 148, 307/149 and 302/34 IPC. 4. Before considering the facts of the case, it is necessary to see the genealogical tree of the parties in order to ascertain their relations, which is as under :- = = = = 4(a). Balmukund Verma (A-6) and Setram Verma (A-7) are the strangers to the aforesaid family. 5. The facts, which are essential for adjudication of these appeals are that, on 06/07/2017 at 17.00 hrs., the appellants, in CRA No.595/2020 and, the respondents, in ACQA No.207/2020, have constituted an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common intention to commit the murder of Bodhiram Verma and Kheduram Verma (since deceaseds). According to the prosecution, a quarrel took place on the said fateful day, owing to the land dispute and, on account of the alleged incident, the complainant- Seema Verma, the daughter of deceased- Bodhiram Verma, lodged a Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-1) on the same day at 19:55 hrs. before the Police Station- Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon, alleging therein that, at the relevant point of time, she Sonu Verma (Injured/PW-2) Seema Verma (complainant/PW-1) Ku. Kajal Verma (PW-3) Tameshwar (A-1) Smt Yamani Verma (A-4) Smt Lata Verma (Injured/PW-5) Smt Ashomati (A-3) Smt Neera Bai @ Bhairi Bai (A-5) Bodhiram (deceased) Ganga Bai (Injured/PW-7) W/o Kheduram (deceased) Visharam (A-2) Late Ramkumar Bodhin Verma (not involved in the alleged crime) Pyari Ram 4 was in front of her house at village- Bazaar Atariya, when the alleged scuffle occurred between the two groups; one group consisting of her father (Bodhiram), mother Smt. Lata Verma, brother (Sonu Verma), maternal uncle- Kheduram Verma (Fufa) and the maternal aunt- Ganga Bai (Bua) and, the another group consisting of her uncle- Visharam Verma, aunt- Smt. Ashomati, elder mother- Neera Bai @ Bhairi, cousin- Tameshwar (S/o Ramkumar Verma- elder father) and sister-in-law(Bhabhi)- Yamini Verma, the wife of said Tameshwar. It is alleged by her that her maternal uncle- Kheduram, on the said fateful day started to return back to his home at Bhilai along with his wife- Ganga Bai by his motorcycle and her uncle- Visharam and his cousin- Tameshwar have chased them, while holding the iron rod and the quarrel amongst others’ of her family members was still going on near her house and, it is alleged further that after some time, they (her said uncle and cousin) returned, holding with bloodstained iron rod and stated that they have committed the murder of them, i.e. Kheduram and his wife-Ganga Bai and started assaulting her father, mother and brother on their head with the aid of iron rod, while others, i.e. Neera Bai @ Bhairi, Ashomati and Yamini with hands and fists and on account of the alleged assault, blood was oozing and they were admitted to the hospital and after some time, her maternal uncle (Fufa) and aunt- Ganga Bai (Bua) were also admitted into the hospital, where her father- Bodhiram and maternal uncle- Kheduram, were declared dead. 6. Based upon the aforesaid information, an FIR (Ex.P-38) was registered against them for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of IPC in connection with Crime No.193/2017 and inquest of the dead bodies of Bodhiram and Kheduram was made vide Exs.P-15 and P-14, respectively and, were sent for autopsy which was conducted by Dr. Praveen Singh Parihar (PW-16), who vide his reports (Exs.P-34 and P-33), opined the 5 cause of their deaths to be coma and haemorrhage occurred on account of head injuries and accordingly, held to be homicidal in nature. The injured persons, namely, Smt. Lata Verma, mother of the complainant- Seema Verma, her maternal aunt- Ganga Bai (Bua) and brother -Sonu Verma were examined by Dr. Amit Jain (PW-15) and the reports Exs. P-27, P-28 and P- 29, respectively, were made by him. 7. During the course of further investigation, an iron rod and shirt with bloodstained along with the motorcycle were seized from the appellant- Tameshwar Verma vide seizure memo Ex.P-19 on 07/07/2017 based upon his disclosure statement Ex. P-16, while the bloodstained iron rod, pant and full shirt from the appellant- Visharam Verma vide seizure memo (Ex.P-20) based upon his disclosure statement (Ex.P-17) and, the articles, so seized along with the bloodstained soil recovered from the spot, were sent for the chemical examination, where human blood was detected from the articles recovered from the appellants, i.e., Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma vide FSL report (Ex.P-58). After recording the statement of the injured- Ganga Bai under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the respondents- Balmuknd Verma and Setram Verma, who are the strangers to the family, were also implicated for the commission of the alleged crime and, after completion of the usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon for the offenece punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of IPC and, the matter was, thereafter, committed to the concerned trial Court and based upon the materials available on record, they have been charge-sheeted for the offence mentioned herein-above and the charges, so framed, were denied by them and claimed to be tried. 8. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, 6 held that the appellants are involved for the commission of the murder of said Bodhiram Verma and Kheduram Verma and, accordingly, they have been convicted and sentenced as mentioned herein-above, while the respondents have been acquitted for the commission of the alleged crime and, being aggrieved, the instant appeals have been preferred. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants in CRA No.595/2020, submits that the findings recorded by the trial Court holding the appellants guilty for the commission of the alleged crime, are apparently contrary to the materials available on record, inasmuch as the evidence led by the prosecution has not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in convicting them as such. While inviting attention to the statement of Seema Verma (PW-1) submits that the appellant- Visharam has also sustained the head injuries, but the prosecution has failed to explain as to how he sustained the alleged injuries, therefore, on account of suppression of material facts, the appellants are entitled to be acquitted from the commission of the alleged crime and, in support, he placed his reliance upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Nand Lal and Others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in (2023) 10 SCC 470. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, while supporting the impugned judgment of conviction and the sentence as awarded and, that by referring to the statement of the injured witnesses, submits that the respondents were also involved actively for the commission of the alleged crime, therefore, the trial court ought not to have acquitted them from the commission of the alleged crime. 11. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record. 7 12. Seema Verma (PW-1) is the daughter of the deceased- Bodhiram Verma and was present at the time of occurrence of the alleged incident, which occurred on 06/07/2015 at 5.00 PM. According to her, the appellants- Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma, who are her cousin and uncle, respectively, were assaulting her father- Bodhiram on his head with the aid of iron rod and were continuously assaulting him despite of his falling down. She deposed further that her brother- Sonu Verma was also assaulted by them on his head with iron rod when he came for rescuing her father. She deposed further that when the appellant- Tameshwar raised the iron rod, the another appellant- Visharam has sustained injuries on his head and, she then went for calling her mother, who came out from the house, while she (Seema Verma) remained at home and called her maternal uncle (Fufa) Kheduram, but, someone, who received the call, informed that he died between the village Kukurmuda and Junwani and his wife- Smt. Ganga Bai (Bua) was being taken to the hospital. Further of her testimony would reveal the fact that the respondents- Yamini Verma, Ashomati and Neera Verma @ Bhairi, who are her sisters-in-law (Bhabhi), aunt and elder mother, respectively, were armed with rod, while the appellants- Tameshwar and Visharam were holding the stick (lathi), who then assaulted her mother and father with the aid of stick (lathi), while said Yamini, Ashomati and Neera Bai @ Bhairi with the aid of rod. She deposed further that the appellant- Tameshwar Verma, while snatching the rod from Yamini, assaulted her mother with the rod and thereafter, all have fled away, while threatening her to kill, if she disclosed their names to anyone. She deposed further that said Ganga Bai after regaining consciousness informed her that when they were going to Bhilai by the motorcycle, the appellant- Tameshwar came from the back side in a Bolero Jeep and assaulted her with the iron rod and after stopping their 8 vehicle, the accused persons started assaulting them. In her cross- examination, it was, however, admitted at paragraph 43 that, she does not aware what had happened with her maternal uncle (Kheduram) and aunt (Ganga Bai). 13. Sonu Verma (PW-2) is the son of the deceased- Bodhiram Verma and was playing cricket along with his friends at the relevant point of time. According to him, the appellants- Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma came and, his father was assaulted by Tameshwar on his head with the aid of rod. It is stated further that upon seeing the alleged assault, he rushed towards the place of incident, where he was assaulted by his uncle -Visharam Verma on his head with the rod. He deposed further that his father was assaulted by Visharam as well by rod and when he fell down, he was also assaulted by him. Further of his testimony would show that his father was assaulted by the appellants as well as by the respondents, i.e., Yamini, Bhairi @ Neera Bai and Ashomati, who have also assaulted his mother as well, while dragging her. 14. Ku. Kajal Verma (PW-3) is the daughter of deceased- Bodhiram Verma and according to her, the appellants- Tameshwar and Visharam have assaulted her father and at the relevant point of time, her brother- Sonu Verma came and prevented the assault from them. She deposed further that her mother fell down upon seeing the alleged incident and the respondents, i.e. Neera Bai @ Bhairi, Ashomati and Yamini reached there and started pulling her hair. 15. Lata Verma (PW-5) is the wife of the deceased- Bodhiram Verma and was doing the stitching work at home and upon receiving the information from her daughter- Seema Verma that her husband was being assaulted, she then 9 came out and asked why are you assaulting him, then Neera Bai @ Bhairi, Yamini and Ashomati started dragging her while holding her hair. She deposed further that her husband was being assaulted by the appellants - Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma with the rod and she was being assaulted by the respondents, i.e., Ashomati, Neera Bai @ Bhairi and Yamini Verma with the rod, owing to which, she became unconscious and was not aware what had happened thereafter. 16. Chandrashekhar Verma (PW-6), who was playing cricket with the deceased- Bodhiram’s son- Sonu Verma, stated that his (Sonu Verma) father and mother were being assaulted by the appellants, i.e. Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma and, Sonu Verma was also assaulted by them when he reached there to rescue his father. He deposed further that the mother of Tameshwar, namely, Neera Bai has assaulted Bodhiram and his wife with the aid of danda (stick). More or less, similar is the statement of Jhaman Verma (PW-11). 17. Ganga Bai (PW-7) is wife of the deceased- Kheduram and according to her, she was returning to Bhilai along with her husband on motorcycle on the said fateful day and, at the relevant point of time, the appellants, i.e. Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma and the respondents, i.e. Neera Bai, Balmukund and Setram came by a four-wheeler from the backside and assaulted her husband on his head and, she fell down and thereafter, they started assaulting her with hands and fists and also with the aid of rod. She deposed further that the appellants were armed with rod, while others’ have assaulted with hands, fists and danda (stick). She deposed further that on account of the alleged assault, she sustained grievous injuries on her head. The statements of others’ are formal in nature. 10 18. It, thus, appears from perusal of the statement of Seema Verma (PW-1) that the deceased- Bodhiram Verma, her father, was assaulted by the appellants, i.e. Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma with the aid of rod. It appears further from her testimony that her brother, namely, Sonu Verma (PW-2) was also assaulted by them when he had tried to intervene the matter and, the iron rod, so recovered from them, vide Ex.P-19 and Ex.P-20, was found to be stained with human blood, as revealed from the FSL report (Ex.P- 58). Although, it was stated by her that her sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Yamini, aunt- Ashomati and elder mother-Neera Bai @ Bhairi were holding the rod at the relevant point of time, while the appellants -Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma were holding the stick (lathi) and assaulted her mother and father with the lathi (stick) and, the respondents (Yamini, Ashomati and Neera Bai) were assaulting them with the rod and after snatching the rod by the appellant- Tameshwar Verma from said Yamini Verma, he assaulted her mother with it, but the alleged of her version was, however, not found to be supported by her brother- Sonu Verma (PW-2) and sister- Ku. Kajal Verma (PW-3), as according to them, the respondents, i.e. Yamini Verma, Neera Bai @ Bhairi and Ashomati were neither armed with the iron rod, nor their father was assaulted by them, as alleged by their sister- Seema Verma (PW-1), nor was she aware regarding the incident, which occurred to her maternal uncle- Kheduram and aunt- Ganga Bai, as revealed from para 43 of her testimony. 19. What is, therefore, revealed from her (Seema Verma) testimony that her statement is found to be supported from her brother- Sonu Verma (PW-2) and sister- Ku. Kajal Verma (PW-3) only with regard to the fact that her father and brother were assaulted by the appellants, Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma and, not with regard to the incident which occurred to her maternal uncle (Fufa) Kheduram Verma and aunt-Ganga Bai. Even, her 11 brother- Sonu Verma (PW-2), sister- Ku. Kajal Verma (PW-3) and mother- Smt. Lata Verma (PW-5) were not aware as to what had happened with them. The statement of Ganga Bai (PW-7) that she and her husband were assaulted either by the appellants (Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma) or by the respondents, was thus, not found to be supported by any of these witnesses. 20. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants in CRA No.595/2020, while placing his reliance upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Nand Lal and others (supra), submits that since the prosecution has suppressed and/or failed to explain the reasons regarding the injuries sustained by the appellant- Visharam, therefore, the appellants have, thus, been implicated falsely in connection with the alleged crime and are entitled to be acquitted. However, the principles laid down therein are distinguishable, as in the said matter, the accused, namely, Naresh Kumar had not only sustained grievous injuries, but was sent for medical examination, and the alleged fact was suppressed by the prosecution, therefore, the appellants/accuseds in the said matter had been given benefit of doubt while acquitting them for the commission of offence. However, in the instant matter, though, from a bare perusal of the statement of Seema Verma (PW-1), it appears, that said appellant – Visharam has sustained injuries, but close scrutiny of her testimony would, however, show that when the another appellant, i.e. Tameshwar has raised the iron rod, then only the alleged injury was caused to him. Therefore, it cannot be said to be inflicted by any of the injured witnesses or could it be said that the prosecution has suppressed the alleged material fact from the Court. Even otherwise, the said appellant- Visharam in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. has not stated that he sustained the injuries on account of the assault made by them. No 12 reliance, therefore, could be placed upon the said decision, as relied upon by the counsel for the appellants. 21. In view of the aforesaid background, CRA No.595/2020 is partly allowed insofar as the murder of deceased- Kheduram is concerned, the appellants- Tameshwar Verma and Visharam Verma are acquitted of the charge of murder of Kheduram and the conviction is, therefore, set aside, and, insofar as the appeal preferred against the murder of deceased- Bodhiram is concerned, we do not find any substance in this appeal and the same is accordingly, dismissed. 22. As far as ACQA No.207/2020 is concerned, we do not find any substance in this appeal. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Judge sunita