1 CRA No.1174/2024 2025:CGHC:61218-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1174 of 2024 Smt. Hirmaniya @ Hirmatiya W/o Late Bhanwar Singh Gond, Aged About 47 Years R/o Village-Jaroundha, Chitapara, P.S.- Khadgawan, District Koriya (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District Koriya (C.G.) ...Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge 16.12.2025 This criminal appeal filed by the appellant-accused under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29/04/2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chirmiri, District Koriya, C.G. in Sessions Trial No. 28/2019, whereby the appellant-accused has been AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.12.17 15:38:54 +0530 2 CRA No.1174/2024 convicted and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 302 of the IPC Life imprisonment & fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation Under Section 452 of the IPC R.I. for 3 years & fine of Rs.200/-, with default stipulation Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 1. (a) During the course of arguments, on 16.09.2025, it came to the notice of this Court that the Medical Officer, namely Dr. S.H. Shinde, who had issued the fitness certificate certifying that the “patient was fit for giving statement” prior to recording of the dying declaration of the deceased on 05.01.2019 at 03:37 p.m., was neither cited as a witness in the charge-sheet nor examined by the prosecution. No effort was made by the prosecution to summon him as a prosecution witness, and the Trial Court also did not examine the said doctor as a Court witness. (b) Considering the said anomaly, this Court directed the Trial Court to record the evidence of Dr. S.H. Shinde and thereafter to put his evidence to the appellant in her statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. (c) Pursuant to the aforesaid direction of this Court, the Trial Court examined Dr. S.H. Shinde as PW-25 on 14.10.2025, and thereafter his evidence was put to the appellant in her statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. on 17.10.2025. 3 CRA No.1174/2024 2. Brief facts of the case is that on 04.01.2019, the complainant Bajrang Singh PW-1 had gone to the Koda Society to sell paddy along with his son Bhagwan Singh PW-2. At around 3:00 PM, his younger son Shravan Singh PW-4 called and informed him that the daughter of Bhagwan Singh (PW-2) namely; Gayatri (since deceased) had been burnt by fire. Thereafter, the complainant reached Devadand along with his son, where the complainant’s wife, daughter-in-law, and grandson brought Gayatri in an Omni vehicle. From there, Gayatri was taken to the hospital. Upon inquiry at the hospital, Gayatri stated that she was alone at home and had gone to sleep due to stomach pain. At around 2:00 PM, the appellant namely; Smt. Hirmaniya @ Hirmatiya W/o Late Bhanwar Singh Gond came and asked about her grandmother to which Gayatri replied that she did not know. Thereafter, the appellant took the kerosene oil kept nearby, poured it on Gayatri, and set her on fire with a matchstick, as a result of which her entire body caught fire. Gayatri then ran towards the school, where Teachers Chandrabhushan Singh Paikra PW-11, Deenbandhu PW-9, and Supet Singh PW-13 extinguished the fire. Thereafter, Police registered merg and inquest proceedings was conducted. From the dying declaration vide Ex.P-35 of the deceased, it was revealed that on the date of the incident, the accused poured kerosene oil on the deceased Gayatri and set her on fire, due to which she suffered burn injuries and 4 CRA No.1174/2024 subsequently died. Spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-6. Appellant was arrested vide Ex.P-23. The dead-body of deceased was sent for postmortem examination and in the postmortem examination report (Ex.P/32), Dr. J.S. Saruta (PW-20) opined that the cause of death was Hypovolemic shock. After completing the investigation, the final report was prepared. 3. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 25 witnesses and exhibited 39 documents. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. The appellant abjured the guilt; pleaded innocence; and false implication. 4. The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record proceeded to convict the appellant herein for the aforementioned offence and sentenced him as mentioned herein-above against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused herein questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the case is not of eye witness rather appellant has been convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt of appellant beyond 5 CRA No.1174/2024 reasonable doubt. It is also clear that the conviction has been made solely on the ground of dying declaration. Learned counsel submits that this is a case of circumstantial evidence, but the chain of circumstances is not complete. The prosecution has failed to examine a single trustworthy and independent witness, therefore convicting the appellant in absence of clinching evidence, is bad in law. Hence, looking to the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution, the alleged offence is not made out against the appellant and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. As such, the criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. 6. Per-contra, learned State counsel supported the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and submits that the prosecution has proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt by leading evidence of clinching nature. The learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence, thus, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 8. The question would be whether the accused-appellant herein is the author of the crime in question ? 9. PW-14 Hirmatiya, W/o Sobhit Ram stated in her evidence that 6 CRA No.1174/2024 she knows the accused and she is the daughter of her uncle. According to this witness, in village relation, she is the grandmother (nani) of the deceased. She further stated that on the date of the incident, at around 4:00 PM, she had gone near the Shiksha Guarantee School to graze goats. At that time, Gayatri came out of her house in a burning condition, crying and screaming, and ran towards the school and entered it. At that time, four teachers were present in the school, one of whom was named Dinbandhu. Then, the children ran out of the school. On seeing the children running, she thought about why the children were running and whether the teachers were present in the school or not. Then she left her goats and went inside the school to see. Inside the school, near the gate, she saw that the teachers had extinguished the fire on Gayatri and had covered her with a mat (dari). 10. Bajrang Singh (PW-1) Grandfather of deceased and Bhagwan Singh (PW-2), father of deceased stated in their evidence on the date of the incident, both of them had gone to the Koda Society village to sell paddy. Their younger son and brother, Shravan (PW-4), informed them by phone that Gayatri had been burned. Thereafter, they boarded a bus and reached village Devadand, where PW-3 Sumitra, wife of PW-1, and PW-5 Meera Bai, wife of PW-2 had taken Gayatri to the Community Health Centre, Khadgawan, for treatment. They also traveled from village 7 CRA No.1174/2024 Devadand to Khadgawan Hospital in the same vehicle. On the way, Gayatri told them that she had been suffering from stomach pain and was sleeping in the veranda (parchi). At that time, the accused came and asked Gayatri where her grandmother had gone. Gayatri replied that she did not know where her grandmother had gone. Thereafter, the accused poured kerosene kept there onto Gayatri and set her on fire with a matchstick. 11. Assistant Teacher Dinbandhu Porte (PW-9), Lecturer Yogesh (PW-10), Teacher Chandrabhushan Singh Paikra (PW-11), Assistant Teacher Birbal Maravi (PW-12), and Assistant Teacher Supet Singh (PW-13), stated that on the date of the incident, they were present in the school when the deceased Gayatri came running in a burning condition, shouting for help. At that time, they rushed with a tablecloth and a mat (dari) to extinguish the fire on Gayatri’s body, managed to put out the flames, and then Dinbandhu Porte carried her and took her to her house. 12. PW-25, Dr. S.H. Shinde, stated that the deceased Gayatri was admitted to the District Hospital, Baikunthpur, due to burn injuries. He stated that a report was submitted by him to the Tehsildar of Baikunthpur for recording the dying declaration of deceased. In the report, he stated his opinion that the deceased was in a condition to give a dying declaration. 13. According to Tehsildar Leeladhar Dhruv, on 05.01.2019, a 8 CRA No.1174/2024 memorandum was received at the Tehsil Office, Baikunthpur, from Police Station Baikunthpur, District Koriya, regarding recording the dying declaration of Gayatri. The said memorandum is Exhibit P- 34. On the same date, he went to the District Hospital, Baikunthpur, and first obtained an opinion from the doctor as to whether Gayatri was in a condition to give a dying declaration or not. In this regard, the doctor opined that she was in a fit condition to give a dying declaration. Thereafter, the dying declaration of Gayatri was recorded in writing. 14. Dying declaration Ex.P-35, given by the deceased is reproduced under: “I am Gayatri, daughter of Shri Bhagwan Singh, aged 17 years, resident of village Salka, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh). I was alone at home. A woman named Hirmatia, who is related to me as my grandmother (nani) and lives in the same village, came there. She sprinkled the kerosene kept in the house on me. After she sprinkled it, I ran, and then she threw a lit matchstick on me, due to which my clothes caught fire from the back side. As I was trying to shake off the fire, I ran towards the school. Some of my hair also got slightly burned. At the school, Dinbandhu Sir, Supet Sir, and Paikra Sir 9 CRA No.1174/2024 extinguished the fire and then brought me to my house. After that, Bittu Bhaiya and my family members took me to Khadgawan Hospital. Thereafter, I was referred to Baikunthpur 15. According to Dr. J.S. Saruta (PW-20), who conducted the postmortem of deceased stated that in the internal examination of the body revealed that the skull, cranium, and vertebrae were healthy, the membranes were intact, and the brain and spinal cord were pale. The diaphragm, ribs, and soft tissues were burned. Carbon particles were found in the larynx and trachea. Both lungs were pale after being cut open. Both chambers of the heart were empty. The diaphragm, intestinal membranes, mouth, and esophagus were pale. Water was present in the stomach. The liver, spleen, and kidneys were all pale. The bladder was empty. The internal and external sensory organs were burned. According to his opinion, the deceased died from shock due to burns, and the time of death was within 36 hours, the exact nature of which could be determined after further investigation. 16. In view of the foregoing discussion, the prosecution has successfully established its case beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonies of PW-14 Hirmatiya and the school teachers namely PW-9 Dinbandhu Porte, PW-10 Yogesh, PW-11 Chandrabhushan Singh Paikra, PW-12 Birbal Maravi and PW-13 Supet Singh are consistent and wholly reliable. Their evidence clearly prove that 10 CRA No.1174/2024 the deceased Gayatri came running to the Shiksha Guarantee School in a burning condition and that the witnesses immediately extinguished the fire and rendered assistance to her. 17. A perusal of the post-mortem report (Ex.P-35) clearly establishes that the deceased Gayatri sustained extensive burn injuries, which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The medical evidence fully corroborates the prosecution version of the incident. Further, the dying declaration of the deceased Gayatri was recorded by Tehsildar Leeladhar Dhruv after obtaining a prior medical opinion given by Dr. S.H. Shinde PW-25 regarding the fitness of deceased to make her statement. The dying declaration was recorded in accordance with law, inspires confidence and stands corroborated by the surrounding circumstances and the ocular evidence on record. There is no material to suggest that the dying declaration was the result of tutoring, coercion or imagination. The trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and has arrived at a just and proper conclusion holding the accused guilty. No perversity, illegality or infirmity is found in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court warranting interference by this Court. 18. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellant is stated to be in jail and she shall serve out the remaining period of jail sentence as awarded to her by the learned trial Court. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned 11 CRA No.1174/2024 Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing the jail sentence to serve the same on the appellant informing her that she 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. 19. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted forthwith to the trial Court for information and necessary action. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Gowri/ Amardeep