1 2025:CGHC:14151 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 303 of 2025 1 - Arti Singh W/o Shri Anoop Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Keshavpur, P.S. - Manipur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 2 - Shyam Bai W/o Shri Ramdhani Singh Aged About 46 Years R/o Village - Samartikra, P.S. - Vishrampur, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Manipur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent ___________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer ___________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board 24/03/2025 1. The appellants have filed the instant criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28/01/2025 passed ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.04.24 14:14:55 +0530 2 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) in Sessions Case No.62/2024, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-2 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 Years and fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 15 days. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that The deceased Anup Singh lived with his family in village Keshavpur, where his mother-in-law Shyam Bai also lived for one and a half years. Anup Singh often had quarrels with his wife Aarti Singh and mother-in-law Shyam Bai over domestic matters. Anup Singh's brother/applicant Akil Singh also lived separately with his family in a nearby house. The incident took place on 25.02.2024At around 9:00 pm, when Akil Singh heard Anoop Singh's daughter Phulki screaming, he went to his brother Anoop Singh's house and saw that Aarti Singh was holding Anoop Singh from the front and Shyam Bai was strangling Anoop with her right hand. Anoop Singh was struggling. Akil Singh separated the three of them, meanwhile Anoop fainted. Then Akil Singh called an ambulance and took Anoop Singh to the district hospital Ambikapur, where he died at 1:00 pm. 3. Dr. Deepak Prakash (PW-9), who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased Anoop Singh and gave its report vide Exhibit P-23 has stated that congestion was found in the eyes of the deceased. There was blueness in the nails of both hands and inside of the lips. There was 3 stiffness in the entire body. Postmortem liquidity was found fixed in the back part of the body. The doctor has stated that the following 15 antemortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased:- (1) There was a reddish brown aggravation on the left forehead side of the head, obliquely placed, measuring 1.7 x 0.4 cm, 3 cm above the left eyebrow and 4 cm from the midline. (2) A reddish brown aggravation, obliquely placed, measuring 2.5 x 0.3 cm was found in the left cheek, located 3 cm from the left angle of the mouth. (3) A red contusion measuring 1.5 x 1 cm was found on the right cheek, extending 3.8 cm from the right ear lobule. (4) There was a lacerated cyst on the inner surface of the left side of the lower lip, measuring 1 x 0.5 cm. The margins of the cyst were irregular and contused. (5) A reddish brown abrasion, obliquely placed, measuring 1.3 x 0.3 cm was found near the anterior part of the left ear. (6) A reddish brown abrasion, obliquely placed, measuring 4 1.5 x 0.3 cm was found near the upper part of the left ear. (7) A reddish brown graded abrasion measuring 4 x 1.7 cms was found over the right ear. (8) Reddish brown color rash on lateral surface of right side of neckAn abrasion (crescentic, nail marks) measuring 1.5 x 0.2 cm was found, located 4.5 cm below the right angle mandible. (9) A reddish brown curved abrasion (crescentic, nail marks) measuring 1.2 x 0.3 cm was found on the lateral surface of left side of neck, located 4.4 cm below the left angle mandible. (10) There was a red contusion in the right lateral part of the neck, measuring 3 x 1 cm, located 4.0 cm from the right mandible. (11) A reddish brown curved abrasion (crescentic, nail marks) measuring 1.6 x 0.3 cm was found on the right lower side of neck, measuring 9.00 cm below the chin and 5.00 cm from the midline. (12) A reddish brown linear abrasion, obliquely placed, measuring 1.5 x 0.2 cm was found on the upper left side 5 of the chest. (13) There was a reddish brown contused abrasion on the right elbow, measuring 2 x 0.9 cm. (14) On the inner side of the left forearm were found five reddish brown linear abrasions, obliquely placed, measuring 1.1 x 0.5, 0.8 x 0.2, 0.6 x 0.1, 0.4 x 0.1 and 0.2 x 0.1 cm, respectively. (15) Three reddish brown linear abrasions, obliquely placed, measuring 0.9 × 0.2, 0.8 x 0.1 and 0.6 × 0.2 cm, were found on the thumb and index finger of the upper hand of the right hand. 4. According to Dr Deepak Prakash, the deceased Anoop Singh died due to obstruction of breathing due to pressing the throat with hands. The injury to the throat was found to be sufficient to cause death. All the injuries were of antemortem nature. The doctor has stated that the nature of Anoop Singh's death was homicidal. 5. On the basis of the information given by Akil Singh about the incident in Manipur Police Station, on 26.02.2024, FIR No. 22/2024 (Ex.P.1) was registered and at the same time FIR Ex.P.2 was registered against accused Aarti Singh and Shyam Bai under Section 302, 34 IPC and investigation was started. Post mortem of the dead body was conducted 6 which is attached to the record Ex.P.23. Map Ex.P.6 was prepared regarding the condition of the dead body in the hospital and Panchnama of the dead body Ex.P.4 was prepared in front of witnesses. After going to the village, a map of the place of occurrence Ex.P.5 was prepared. A steel pipe was seized from the place of occurrence in front of witnesses and seizure sheet Ex.P.19 was prepared. Accused Aarti Singh was taken into custody and after questioning her, memorandum of her statements Ex.P.17 was recorded. The towel used in the incident was seized from the possession of accused Aarti Singh and seizure memo Ex.P.-20 was prepared. 6. Memorandum Ex.P. 18 was prepared after taking accused Shyam Bai in custody and interrogating her in front of witnesses. Glass bangles were seized from accused Shyam Bai and seizure memo Ex.P.-21 was prepared. Patwari map of the place of incident Ex.P.-7 was prepared through Tehsildar. Statements of witnesses were recorded during investigation. After completing the investigation, chargesheet was presented against accused Aarti Singh and Shyam Bai under Section 302, 34 IPC before Chief Judicial Magistrate Ambikapur, from where after production in Sessions Court, after being transferred for trial, remaining proceedings are being completed and decision is being given. 7. During the trial, charges were framed against the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC 1860. The accused denied the above 7 charges and sought trial. Then the prosecution got 11 witnesses examined in support of its case and exhibited 27 documents. 8. The accused have stated in their statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. The accused have not presented any evidence in their defence. The learned trial Court after evaluating the evidence and the material available on record convicted the appellants as aforesaid. Hence this appeal. 9. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the prosecution witness Akhil Singh (PW-1) has turned hostile and he has not supported the case of the prosecution and has clearly deposed that at the time of incident he was at his home and has not seen the incident. He would next contend that the trial Court has convicted the appellants under Section 304 Part II IPC. He would next contend that the another prosecution witness Sajjan Singh (PW-7) has also not supported the prosecution case. He would next contend that the witness Pradeep Singh alias Chenga (PW-4) has narrated different stories in the statement given under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in Examination-in-Chief as well as in cross- examination and the trial Court has relied upon the statement of this witness. He would lastly contend that under these circumstances, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court requires interference by this Court and the appellants deserve to acquitted and the instant may be allowed. 8 10. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court is just and proper as the trial Court on the basis of the testimony of the son of the deceased namely Pradeep Singh (PW-4), who has seen the incident. Therefore, no interference is called for by this Court. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the evidence and record with utmost circumspection. 12. The first question for consideration would be, whether the trial Court was justified in holding that death of deceased Anoop Singh was homicidal in nature ? 13. The trial Court, relying upon the statement of Dr. Deepak Prakash (PW-9), who has conducted postmortem of the deceased- Anoop Singh, clearly came to the conclusion that the death of deceased- Anoop Singh was homicidal in nature due to asphyxia due to manual strangulation. The said finding recorded by the trial Court is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to record. I hereby affirm the said finding. 14. The next question for consideration would be, whether the trial Court has rightly held that the appellants are the author of the crime? 15. The trial Court, relying upon the statement of Dr. Deepak Prakash (PW-9), who has conducted postmortem of the deceased- Anoop 9 Singh vide Ex.P-23, clearly came to the conclusion that the death of deceased- Anooop Singh was homicidal in nature due to asphyxia due to manual strangulation. 16. Pradeep Singh alias Chenga, who is the son of the deceased, has been examined as PW-4. He has stated that on the date of incident while he woke up from the sleep he saw that his mother and maternal mother- in-law had assaulted his father because of which he died. He further stated that his mother and maternal grandmother had assaulted his father by way of Jhara. He also stated that some dispute took place between his father and his maternal grandmother. His father had told his maternal grandmother to run away to which she said that she will not go. On a question being asked by the Court this witness stated that his father’s house and his uncle’s house is adjacent to each other. He stated that he has seen his mother and maternal grandmother assaulting his father in the night. His father used to quarrel with his mother and maternal grandmother after consuming liquor. 17. The said finding recorded by the trial Court is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to record. We hereby affirm the said finding. 18. A careful perusal of the aforesaid findings recorded by the trial Court would show that the prosecution has established that, 1. death of deceased Anoop Singh was homicidal in 10 nature; 2. on the date of offence, only appellants & the deceased were staying in the same house ; and 3. It is the appellants who have murdered the deceased by strangulation. 19. Considering the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the finding recorded by the trial Court in operative part of its judgment, the fact that the appellants have not offered any explanation under Section 313 of the CrPC and considering the statement of son (P.W.-4) of the deceased, who has clearly stated that his father was killed by his mother and maternal grandmother, on the date of incident only deceased and appellants were in the house, and when he woke up from the sleep, he saw that his father had died and he had seen his mother and maternal grandmother assaulting his father, thereafter he was taken to hospital where he died, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants for offence under Section 304 Part-2 IPC. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the findings recorded by the trial Court. 20. For the foregoing reasons, the criminal appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 21. It is stated at the Bar that the appellants are in jail, they shall serve out 11 the sentence as ordered by the learned trial Court. 22. Let a copy of this judgment and the original record be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. SD/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge ashu