1 CRA No.1370/2021 2025:CGHC:58538-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1370 of 2021 Satish Gardiya S/o Charles Gardiya Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Gerrabhatha Police Station Basna, District - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station - Tendukona, District - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. …..Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant : Mr. Anil Gultati, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge 03.12.2025 This criminal appeal filed by the appellant-accused under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08/07/2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Mahasamund, (C.G.) in Sessions Case No. 03/2019, whereby the appellant-accused has been convicted and sentenced as under:- AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.12.03 17:14:15 +0530 2 CRA No.1370/2021 Conviction Sentence Under Section 302 of the IPC Life imprisonment & fine of Rs.2000/-, with default stipulation. 1. Brief facts of the case is that on 26.09.2018, police of P.S. Tendukona Police Station received information regarding a murder of a woman in Beldih village. Upon receiving this information, the police went to the spot and found a woman lying dead in a pool of blood in the courtyard of Pradhan Sona PW-3 and the appellant/accused was also lying injured in the street. Thereafter, merg was registered vide Ex.P-7 and the FIR was registered against the appellant vide Ex.P-23, which was lodged by the complainant Shashi Das (PW-1). The complainant stated that a program for Ekashiya (Chhatti) was organized on 24.09.2018 to celebrate the birth of twin girls of his younger brother Ashishdas. The appellant along with his wife- Sapnabai (since deceased) came to attend the program on 23.09.2018. On September 25, 2018, at 7-8 a.m., the appellant returned to his village. His wife was staying at her sister Kiran's house in Beldih village. Suddenly, on 26/09/2018, the appellant returned to his village and asked about his wife and came to know that she was at her sister Kiran's house in Beldih village. Then, the appellant went to his brother-in-law, Pradhan Sona's house. His house and Pradhan Sona's house are adjacent to each other. At approximately 5:00 p.m., hearing a woman scream for help, the complainant and Pradhan Sona went to the location. They found 3 CRA No.1370/2021 Sapnabai lying on the ground in the street, covered in blood, and her husband, Satish Gardia/appellant, standing there with a knife in his hand. The appellant had killed his wife by assaulting her throat with a knife. Subsequently, the accused also slit his own throat with his own knife and dropped the knife near the body of deceased/Sapna Bai, fell on the ground and became unconscious. During the investigation, spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-9. Appellant was arrested vide Ex.P-8. Knife was seized and sent for chemical examination to FSL. The dead-body of deceased was sent for postmortem examination and in the postmortem examination report (Ex.P/15), Dr. M.S. Dadsen (PW- 6) opined that the cause of death was hypovolemic shock, loss of blood due to deep incised wound front of the neck and the nature of death was homicidal. After completing the investigation, the final report was prepared. 2. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 29 documents. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein he denied guilt, however, he examined none in his defence and did not bring any document in his support either. 3. 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 4 CRA No.1370/2021 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. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The learned trial Court failed to appreciate that there is material contradiction and omission in the statement of witnesses. Learned counsel submits that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the appellant tried to save his wife and due to this, he himself suffered injuries. He further submits that there is no intention or motive on the part of the appellant to cause injury to the deceased. Learned counsel submits that the case is based on surmises and conjectures. Hence, the present appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. 5. 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. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the 5 CRA No.1370/2021 records with utmost circumspection. 7. In the postmortem report of deceased vide Ex.P-15, Dr. M.S. Dadsena PW-6 found that blood was visible on the left lip, and blood was pooled on her face. A deep, transversely incised wound was visible above the thyroid cartilage of the neck, with sharp, regular margins. The wound measured 8.6 cm long and 3.3 cm deep. The wound on the left side of the neck was 2.5 cm deep, and the wound on the right side was 2.3 cm deep. The trachea, muscles, arteries, and veins were also cut transversely, and the jugular vein was also cut transversely, where there was excessive bleeding and some blood was visible. 8. The first and foremost question is as to whether the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature, which the learned trial Court has recorded in affirmative by taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence available on record and particularly considering the postmortem report (Ex.P/15) which is duly proved by the evidence of Dr. M.S. Dadsena (PW-6). Accordingly, taking into consideration the postmortem report and the statement of Dr. M.S. Dadsena (PW-6) that the cause of death was hypovolemic shock, loss of blood due to deep incised wound front of the neck and the nature of death was homicidal, we are of the considered opinion that the learned trial Court is absolutely justified in holding that the death of the deceased is homicidal in nature, as the same 6 CRA No.1370/2021 is correct finding of fact based on evidence and same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. Accordingly, we hereby affirmed the said finding. 9. Now the next question would be whether the accused-appellant herein is the author of the crime in question ? 10. Shashidas (PW-1) complainant and relative of the appellant, stated in his evidence that he knows the accused/appellant. About 6-7 months ago, the wife of his younger brother Ashish Das had given birth to twins and to attend the function 24.09.2018, the accused along with his wife came to their house in village Beldih on 23.09.2018. After completion of function, on 25.09.2018, the accused told him that he was going to his house in Gerrabhatha and would return to village Beldih after two days. He told that his wife would stay at her sister Kiran's house for now. He further stated that on September 26, 2018, the accused came to their house again. Shortly after dinner, he asked where Sapna was. He told him that Sapna had gone to her sister Kiran's house. After some time, Kiran and Pradhan Sona arrived for dinner. Subsequently, they heard a woman screaming for help from the street outside their house. Upon hearing this, he and Pradhan Sona went to the street and saw Sapna staggering in the street, covered in blood, with the accused following her. Accused was holding a knife in his right hand. Then, the appellant grabbed 7 CRA No.1370/2021 Sapna and slit her throat with the knife, which he and Pradhan witnessed. He further stated that Sapna collapsed at the scene, seeing them, the accused, frightened, attempted to slit his own throat with the same knife. He then discarded the knife and after walking a short distance, the appellant fell down and became unconscious. 11. Neetu Das (PW-2) stated that in her evidence that she recognized the accused, who is the husband of the deceased. About 6–7 months prior, at around 5:30 p.m., when she was going to her shop and while passing through the street near the residence of Pradhan Sona and Shashidas, she saw the accused standing there after having murdered his wife. Both Sapna and the accused were covered in blood and Sapna had died. The accused was holding a blood-soaked knife in his hand. Shashidas and Pradhan Sona were also present at the scene. She categorically stated that when the knife seized in the case was shown to her during evidence, she stated that it was the same knife she had seen in the hand of the accused at that time. 12. Pradhan Sona (PW-3) stated in his evidence that that he knows the accused, who was the husband of the deceased Sapna. Sapna had come to her sister Kiran's house in Beldih village for attending a function on September 24, 2018. He also attended the function. After the function, Sapna introduced the accused to 8 CRA No.1370/2021 everyone as her husband and stated that she had been living with him for three months. Before marrying the accused, the deceased had been married to another man in Jhalap village. He stated that on September 25, 2018, the accused left the deceased in Beldih village and returned to his home. On September 26, 2018, about 4 p.m., the accused returned to Beldih. At that time, the deceased was at her sister Kiran's house. After the accused arrived, the deceased made tea and served it to everyone. This witness further stated that after drinking tea, his wife went to the neighbor house of Shashidas and he himself left for the market to buy some groceries. After some time, while he was talking to his wife, he heard a woman's cries for help coming from the direction of his house. Upon which, he and Shashidas looked towards their house and saw that the accused had slit the throat of the deceased, Sapna Bai, with a knife. At that time, the deceased was covered in blood, and the accused was using the same knife to stab himself in the throat with the intention of slitting his own throat. The knife, stained with blood, was in the accused's hand. He further stated that the accused then discarded the knife, left the house, and went towards Shashidas's house and fainted in front of Shashidas's house. The accused was covered in blood at that time. The deceased, Sapna Bai, died after the accused slit her throat with a knife. 13. As per the FSL report vide Ex.P-29, blood was found on the 9 CRA No.1370/2021 clothes of deceased i.e. Article A-1 to A-5; on the clothes of the appellant i.e. Articel E-1 to E-3 and also on the weapon used in the crime i.e. Knife (Article-D). 14. In view of the consistent and reliable eyewitness testimonies of Shashidas (PW-1), Neetu Das (PW-2) and Pradhan Sona (PW-3), all of whom categorically identified the accused as the perpetrator who slit the throat of the deceased, coupled with the recovery of the blood-stained knife (Article-D) and the FSL report (Ex. P-29) and the injuries suffered by the deceased which is reflected from the postmortem report of deceased vide Ex.P-15 conducted by Dr. M.S. Dadsena PW-6, confirming the presence of blood on the clothes of the deceased (Articles A-1 to A-5), on the clothes of the appellant (Articles E-1 to E-3), and on the weapon used in the offence i.e. knife, the prosecution case stands firmly established. The sequence of events leading to the death of Sapna Bai has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant’s conduct, as witnessed immediately before and after the incident, leaves no room for any alternative hypothesis. Accordingly, no infirmity or illegality is found in the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court and the view taken by the learned trial Court that the appellant is the author of the crime is a pure finding of fact based on evidence available on record. We hereby affirm that finding. 10 CRA No.1370/2021 15. In the result, this Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the appellant. The conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial court to the appellant is hereby upheld. The present criminal appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. 16. The appellant is stated to be in jail and he shall serve out the remaining period of jail sentence as awarded to him by the learned trial Court. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing the 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. 17. 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