1 CGHC010223642018 2026:CGHC:28501-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 265 of 2018 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Incharge Police Station Arjunda, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus Ravi Kumar S/o Late Dukhit Ram Thakur, Aged About 31 Years, R/o. Village Pirid, Police Station Arjunda, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Shri Vinod Tekam, Govt. Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Mahima Chandra, Advocate. DB: Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Judgment on Board 09/07/2026 Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22/09/2017 passed in Sessions Trial No.6/2017, whereby, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge Balod, District Balod (C.G.) has acquitted the respondent from the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2026.07.09 18:10:23 +0530 2 2) From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent-Ravi Kumar has been charge-sheeted for the commission of murder of his mother-Ramli Bai, on the allegation that on 23/09/2016 at 06.30 P.M., he demanded money from her in order to defend the case pending before the Court of Gunderdehi and when it was refused, he got annoyed and assaulted her with the aid of knife, owing to which, she sustained grievous injuries and was admitted into the hospital and during the course of treatment, she died on same day i.e. 23/09/2016. 3) Although, it was alleged by the prosecution that the respondent has committed the murder of his mother on the said fateful day with the aid of knife, when money demanded by him was refused by her, but from perusal of the statement of the deceased’s son-Jitendra and daugher-in-law Smt. Santoshi, the wife of the respondent, it appears that they have not stated anywhere that she was assaulted by him as such, nor the other prosecution witnesses, namely, Smt. Bunda Bai (PW-9), Salikram (PW-10) and one Rajesh Kumar (PW-11) have stated so, or have seen the occurrence of the alleged incident. 4) Pertinently to be noted here further that based upon the disclosure statement (Ex.P-4), a knife was recovered from the possession of the respondent on 02/10/2016 in presence of two witnesses, namely, Awadhram Sahu (PW-1) and Ganga Prasad Deshmukh (PW-3) but, both these witnesses have, however, turned hostile without supporting the alleged recovery in their presence, nor even 3 the blood was found on it, as revealed from the seizure memo (Ex.P-6) and, nor even, when it was sent for chemical examination, blood was found, as revealed from the FSL Report (Ex.P-23). 5) It is to be seen further that though the Dr. Nurendra Kumar Sahu (PW-8), who conducted the autopsy of the dead-body, has opined that she died because of hemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries over her neck, but in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence led by the prosecution, as observed herein-above, it cannot be said that the deceased was assaulted by her son-the respondent herein and, the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting him from the commission of alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 6) The appeal being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE JUDGE Kamde