1 2026:CGHC:3526-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 146 of 2014 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, P.S. Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G., Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Harishankar @ Banti Yadav S/o Dashrath Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o Bazarpara, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G. 2 - Kishankumar @ Monu S/o Lavkush Kahna Aged About 21 Years R/o Bazarpara, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G. ... Respondents For Appellant/State : Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Respondents : None, though served. DB: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Judgment on Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 21/01/2026 1. This appeal has been preferred by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 10.04.2013 passed by the learned NIKITA JAIN Digitally signed by NIKITA JAIN Date: 2026.01.22 10:35:05 +0530 2 Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.174/12, whereby the respondents have been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 20.04.2012, a merg intimation (Ex.P.-1) was lodged by one Ramvilas Rathore before the Police Station Janjgir, stating therein, that he heard noise when he was at Shani Temple that the deceased was lying drenched in blood near the Family Court. Based upon that, an FIR (Ex.P.-2) was registered against an unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and, during investigation, a bracelet and locket was recovered from respondent No.1-Harishankar on 13.05.2012 in presence of two witnesses, namely, Alok Mishra and Ashok Bajaj, while a stone, alleged to have been used for the commission of offence, was seized from the spot vide Ex.P.-5 and during further investigation, it was revealed that the respondents were seen with the deceased on the said fateful day and, accordingly, based upon the last seen theory, they have been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC, which was denied by them and claimed to be tried. 3. 3. In order to establish the alleged allegation, mother of the deceased- Shakuntala Tiwari was examined as PW-1 and, from her testimony, it appears that on the date of incident, i.e., on 20.04.2012 around 9:30- 10:00 p.m., a quarrel of her son took place with the respondents, who abused him with filthy words and, the alleged quarrel was intercepted by one Ramvilas Rathore and thereafter her son came into the house 3 and shortly thereafter, he went towards the Court and the respondents, after sometime followed him. It reveals further from her testimony that a telephonical information was received by her when she was at home that someone has killed her son near the Family Court at Janjgir. Ramvilas Rathore (PW-2), who intercepted the matter, has also stated that on the said fateful day, he has intervened the quarrel, which had occurred between the deceased and the respondents and, deposed further that he heard the noise when he was at Shani Temple around 10-10:30 p.m. that the deceased was lying drenched in blood near the Court. Further of his testimony would show that after intervening the alleged incident, he has not seen the respondents on the main road. Sarang Maratha (PW-4), who was a property dealer, has stated in his evidence that near the Family Court, the deceased and two to three persons were quarreling with each other, but was unable to state as to whether the respondents were there or not and, from para 4 of his testimony, it appears that the respondents were not there on the spot when the alleged quarrel was going on with the deceased. 4. What is, therefore, reflected from their testimonies that a quarrel had taken place near the house of the deceased with the respondents, but none of the witnesses have, however, stated that near the Family Court, he was assaulted by the respondents and even Sarang Maratha (PW-4), though, stated that he has seen the incident, which was occurred near the Family Court, but has not seen that the respondents were assaulting the deceased. 5. Pertinently to be noted here further that a blood stained stone, alleged to have been used for the commission of alleged crime, was seized 4 from the spot on 21.04.2012 vide Ex.P.-5 and, the Dr. M. D. Tendue (PW-10) has opined for its chemical examination in order to ascertain whether it is a human blood or not, but no report to this effect has, however, been placed on record for the reasons best known to the prosecution. 6. In view of the above, and in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence led by the prosecution, it is difficult to hold that the respondents were involved for the commission of the alleged crime and, the trial Court after taking note of those materials has, therefore, not erred in acquitting them from the commission of the alleged crime. 7. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE JUDGE Nikita