1 CGHC010214222025 2026:CGHC:35555-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1086 of 2025 1. Sarwar Khan S/o. Anwar Khan Aged About 23 Years R/o. Village - Sukwana, P.S. Gadwa, Dist. Gadwa (Jharkhand) 2. Shahid Khan S/o. Aslam Khan Aged About 22 Years R/o. Village - Sarkoni, P.S.-Maghiaw, Dist. Gadwa (Jharkhand) 3. Faijan Khan S/o. Afsar Khan Aged About 19 Years R/o. Village - Sarkoni, P.S. Maghiaw, Dist. Gadwa (Jharkhand) ... Appellant(s) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer- P.S. Pratappur, Distt. Surajpur (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.08.13 17:29:13 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 12 .08.2026 1. Heard Mr. A.N. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Ashish Shukla, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent. 2. Although the matter is listed today for hearing on I.A. No. 1 of 2025, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, considering the fact that the appellants have been in custody since 27.09.2020 and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing. 3. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants under Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “the BNSS”), assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.) (for short, “the learned trial Court”) in Sessions Trial No. 142 of 2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as follows: Conviction under Section Sentence Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’) Rigorous imprisonment (for short, ‘R.I.’) for life and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine, 02 years 3 R.I. more. Section 394/34 of the IPC R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 year R.I. more. Section 120(B) of the IPC R.I. for life and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine, 02 years R.I. more. All the sentences run concurrently 4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the informant, Shailendra Kumar Singh (PW-1), lodged information at Police Station Pratappur on 31.08.2020 at about 12:30 p.m., stating that on the same day, at about 00:40 hours, while he was returning to Pratappur from Amarkantak, he noticed an unknown person lying on the main road near Village Khorama. The said person had sustained an injury on his head and was bleeding. Accordingly, Merg No. 87/2020 under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘CrPC’) was registered at Police Station Pratappur and an inquiry was taken up. 5. During the course of inquiry, the statements of the informant and other witnesses were recorded. Upon inspection of the place of occurrence, no evidence indicative of any vehicular accident was found. It was also noticed that the deceased was not wearing a shoe on his right foot. The postmortem examination of the unidentified dead body was conducted at the Community Health Centre, Pratappur. In the postmortem report, the Medical Officer opined that the cause of death was neurogenic shock and that the nature of death was homicidal. On the basis of the spot 4 inspection, statements of witnesses and the postmortem report, an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) was registered against an unknown person and investigation was taken up. 6. During the course of investigation, the photograph of the unidentified deceased was circulated through mobile and social media platforms for the purpose of identification. Subsequently, the deceased was identified as Chitrang Sahu, son of Ram Sohagi, aged about 40 years, resident of Village Maniyari, Police Station Saja, District Bemetara. Upon arrival of the legal heirs of the deceased, the dead body was exhumed, identified by them and thereafter handed over to them under proper supurdnama. 7. The statements of the legal heirs of the deceased were recorded. During investigation, it came to light that deceased Chitrang Sahu had taken his Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04/HA-0216 on booking from Raipur to Ambikapur via Pratappur. It was further revealed that the deceased had been murdered near Khorama, Pratappur, and that his Scorpio vehicle had been taken away by the assailants. 8. During the course of investigation, CCTV footage from Raipur was examined and various hotels and lodges were checked for tracing the persons involved in the commission of the offence. On 26.09.2020, information was received that the accused persons had proceeded towards Ramanujganj. A raid was accordingly conducted and the accused persons were apprehended. Pursuant to their memorandum statements (Exs.P/10 and P/11), the hammer allegedly used in the commission of the offence, the clothes worn by them, one country-made pistol, cartridges, the looted Scorpio vehicle and the mobile phone and driving licence of the 5 deceased were seized. 9. On finding sufficient material indicating the involvement of the accused persons in the commission of the offence, Sections 394 and 34 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 were added. The accused persons were accordingly arrested. During investigation, the seized articles were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pratappur, from where the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial on 08.01.2021. 10. The accused persons, namely, Sarwar Khan, Shahid Khan and Faizan Khan, denied the charges framed against them under Sections 302 and 394 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. They pleaded innocence and false implication. However, the accused persons did not adduce any evidence in their defence. 11. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 25 witnesses and exhibited 40 documents. 12. Upon conclusion of the trial and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the learned trial Court, by the impugned judgment dated 15.05.2025, convicted the appellants and sentenced them as detailed in paragraph 03 of the said judgment. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants have preferred the present appeal questioning the legality, propriety and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 13. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the 6 appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the learned trial Court has failed to properly appreciate the evidence available on record and has convicted the appellants on the basis of an incomplete and unreliable chain of circumstances. According to learned counsel, the prosecution has failed to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, the presence of the appellants at the place of occurrence or their participation in the homicidal death of the deceased. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery of the hammer, Scorpio vehicle, mobile phone, driving licence and other articles at the instance of the appellants does not, by itself, establish their involvement in the murder, particularly when there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. 14. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the prosecution has failed to establish any motive on the part of the appellants to commit the alleged offence and that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses suffers from material contradictions, omissions and inconsistencies. It is also contended that the evidentiary value of the alleged memorandum statements and consequential recoveries is doubtful and that the statutory requirements governing such recoveries have not been satisfactorily established. It is argued that the mere recovery of certain articles allegedly connected with the deceased, in the absence of other incriminating circumstances forming a complete chain, cannot be made the basis for conviction for murder. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of doubt and consequent acquittal. 7 15. Per contra, learned State counsel, while supporting the impugned judgment, submits that the prosecution has successfully established a complete and cogent chain of circumstances pointing towards the guilt of the appellants. It is contended that the death of deceased Chitrang Sahu was homicidal in nature and that the medical evidence clearly establishes the nature and cause of his death. It is further submitted that during investigation, the Scorpio vehicle of the deceased, his mobile phone and driving licence, as well as the hammer allegedly used in the commission of the offence, were recovered pursuant to the memorandum statements of the accused persons. According to learned State counsel, the said recoveries constitute important incriminating circumstances connecting the appellants with the commission of the offence. 16. Learned State counsel further submits that the recoveries were duly proved by the prosecution witnesses and that the seized articles were subjected to the requisite examination during investigation. It is contended that the appellants have failed to offer any satisfactory explanation with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against them. According to learned State counsel, the circumstances proved by the prosecution, when considered cumulatively, form a complete chain which points only towards the guilt of the appellants and excludes every reasonable hypothesis consistent with their innocence. It is, therefore, submitted that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and that the impugned judgment does not warrant any interference in the present appeal. 17. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length, considered 8 their rival submissions and carefully perused the entire oral and documentary evidence available on record, as also the impugned judgment. 18. In order to appreciate the rival submissions and to examine the correctness of the findings recorded by the learned trial Court, it would be appropriate to consider the evidence adduced by the prosecution in its proper perspective and determine whether the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution form a complete and unbroken chain pointing towards the guilt of the appellants. 19. The first question which arises for consideration is whether the learned trial Court was justified in holding that the death of deceased Chitrang Sahu was homicidal in nature. 20. In this regard, the prosecution has relied upon the testimony of Dr. A.K. Vishwakarma (PW-12), Medical Officer, who deposed that on 31.08.2020 at about 04:25 p.m., an unidentified male dead body was brought to him for postmortem examination. On external examination, several injuries were found, including swelling over the left mandibular region, contusion over the posterolateral aspect of the neck, contusion over the right postero-occipital region and a punctured wound over the right occipital region. On internal examination, fracture of the occipital bone and subarachnoid haemorrhage were found, along with damage to the brain parenchyma beneath the fracture site. The Doctor opined that the cause of death was neurogenic shock, the time since death was approximately 12 to 18 hours, and the nature of death was homicidal. The postmortem report and short postmortem report were marked as Exs.P/27 9 and P/28, respectively. 21. The testimony of PW-12 has remained substantially unshaken in cross-examination and stands corroborated by Exs.P/27 and P/28. He further opined, upon examination of the seized hammer, that the injury sustained by the deceased in the occipital region could have been caused by the said weapon. His report in this regard was marked as Ex.P/29. 22. Dr. Bhupendra Singh (PW-14) has corroborated the testimony of PW-12 and stated that the postmortem examination was conducted jointly by them. He also concurred with the findings recorded in Exs.P/27 and P/28. 23. Thus, the medical evidence available on record, read as a whole, clearly establishes that the death of deceased Chitrang Sahu was homicidal in nature. We, therefore, concur with the finding recorded by the learned trial Court in this regard. 24. The next and more crucial question which arises for consideration is whether the prosecution has established, by legally admissible and reliable evidence, that it was the appellants who caused the homicidal death of deceased Chitrang Sahu and committed the offences alleged against them. 25. The present case rests principally upon circumstantial evidence. There is no eyewitness to the actual occurrence. The prosecution case is founded upon a series of circumstances, including the homicidal death of deceased Chitrang Sahu, the disappearance of his Scorpio vehicle and other belongings, and the subsequent recovery of the Scorpio vehicle, 10 mobile phone, driving licence and other articles allegedly connected with the deceased, as well as the alleged weapon of offence, pursuant to the memorandum statements of the appellants. The evidentiary value of these circumstances, individually as well as cumulatively, therefore requires careful examination. It is also necessary to ascertain whether the alleged memorandum statements and consequential recoveries were duly proved in accordance with law and whether the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution form a complete and unbroken chain pointing towards the guilt of the appellants and are inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of their innocence. 26. We shall now proceed to examine the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and ascertain whether the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution have been duly established. Since the prosecution case rests upon circumstantial evidence, the testimony of each witness assumes significance only to the extent that it establishes a particular link in the chain of circumstances. 27. The prosecution first relies upon the testimony of Shailendra Kumar Singh (PW-1). He deposed that on the night of 30.08.2020, while he was returning along with his family from Amarkantak, Madhya Pradesh, in a vehicle driven by Chandrabhaskar Patel, they reached near the Tendu-leaf godown at Village Khorama, where they noticed a person lying on the main road in a blood-stained condition. On stopping the vehicle and getting down, they found that the person had already died. He stated that the deceased appeared to be about 35 years of age and that information was conveyed by him to Police Station Pratappur over mobile phone at 11 about 1:00 a.m. The following morning, he was called to the police station, where, on the basis of the information furnished by him, Merg Intimation, Ex.P/1, was recorded. The police had removed the dead body from the spot during the night itself. He further stated that the police prepared the spot map, Ex.P/2, and obtained his signatures thereon. The contents of Ex.P/1 substantially corroborate his version regarding the information of an unidentified dead body having been given to the police during the night. 28. Khemalal Sahu (PW-4), father-in-law of the deceased Chitrang Sahu, stated that the deceased used to drive a Scorpio vehicle belonging to his nephew Dushyant Kumar Sahu on booking. According to him, on the date of occurrence, the appellants had taken the Scorpio vehicle on booking from Raipur towards Pratappur. Thereafter, the deceased could not be contacted for about two days and his mobile phone remained switched off. Consequently, the family members approached Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur. They were informed that an unidentified person had been murdered and his body had been found near Khorama forest within the jurisdiction of Police Station Pratappur. A photograph of the deceased was thereafter received through WhatsApp, on the basis of which the witness and other family members identified him as Chitrang Sahu. 29. The said witness further stated that, after identifying the photograph, he, Bhav Singh (PW-20), Dushyant Sahu (PW-21) and the driver of their vehicle proceeded from Raipur to Pratappur. On reaching there, they learnt that the body had already been buried as an unidentified dead body. The police took them to the place of occurrence, where dried blood was visible on the roadside and had been surrounded by bricks. The police 12 thereafter conducted identification proceedings in respect of the deceased's photograph, clothes and footwear, which were marked as Ex.P/3. The dead body was subsequently exhumed in their presence and an exhumation panchnama, Ex.P/4, was prepared. After exhumation, the body was handed over to Bhav Singh under Ex.P/5. The witness's testimony regarding identification of the deceased stands corroborated by Ex.P/3 and remained substantially unshaken in cross-examination. 30. The aforesaid version is also supported by Bhav Singh Sahu (PW- 20), brother-in-law of the deceased, and Dushyant Kumar Sahu (PW-21), nephew of the deceased and owner of the Scorpio vehicle. Dushyant Kumar stated that, as he owned the vehicle, there was a WhatsApp group through which vehicle bookings were communicated. During the lockdown, as there was no regular source of income, he had asked the deceased to take his Scorpio vehicle on booking. Accordingly, on 30.08.2020, the deceased left Raipur with the appellants in the Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04/HA-0216 for Ambikapur. Thereafter, the deceased's mobile phone remained switched off and he could not be contacted. The witness and other family members accordingly approached Police Station Gudhiyari. The registration certificate and insurance papers of the Scorpio vehicle were seized from Dushyant Kumar vide Ex.P/33. The said documents corroborate his ownership of the vehicle. His testimony has not been materially impeached in cross-examination. 31. Deepak Dubey (PW-5) stated that the police brought the dead body to the Community Health Centre, Pratappur, for postmortem examination and called him for identification. He stated that the deceased was wearing 13 one shoe, jeans, shirt and a gamchha and that he noticed injuries on his head. He participated in the inquest proceedings, for which notice Ex.P/6 was issued and the inquest panchnama was prepared as Ex.P/7. Since the identity of the deceased could not initially be ascertained, the body was buried near the cremation/burial ground at Khorama, for which Ex.P/8 was prepared. On the following day, after the arrival of the relatives of the deceased from Raipur, the body was exhumed in the presence of the witness and other villagers. The proceedings were videographed. He further stated that, after the family members identified the deceased, the body was handed over to them before the competent authority. 32. The testimony of PW-5 is substantially corroborated by Devsharan (PW-11) and Jalim Sai (PW-6), who also supported the proceedings relating to the burial and subsequent exhumation of the unidentified body. Their evidence has not been materially discredited in cross-examination. 33. Naib Tehsildar Poonam Rashmi Tigga (PW-19) stated that, during the investigation of Merg No.87/2020, she was requested by the police for exhumation of the unidentified dead body after its identification by the relatives of the deceased. In her presence, and in the presence of the relatives and other witnesses, the body was exhumed and Ex.P/4 was prepared. In cross-examination, she stated that the relatives identified the deceased on the basis of the photographs taken at the time of burial and the clothes worn by him. Her testimony remained substantially unchallenged. 34. Patwari Vasudev Manjhi (PW-23) stated that, on the instructions of the Tehsildar, he visited the place of occurrence situated at Village 14 Khorama, made enquiries from the witnesses and prepared the spot map and panchnama, Ex.P/51. His evidence is corroborated by the said document. 35. Constables Niranjan Ekka (PW-7) and Parmeshwar Ram Paikra (PW-9) are witnesses to the seizure of articles connected with the postmortem examination. The preserved viscera and other body parts of the deceased, as well as his clothes, including shirt, baniyan, jeans, socks, underwear, gamchha, belt, red thread and amulet, along with the tibia bone, were seized vide Exs.P/22 to P/24. Constable Praveen Kumar Singh (PW-10) stated that on 02.11.2020 he deposited the seized articles before the Forensic Science Laboratory, Ambikapur, through the Superintendent of Police, Surajpur, and obtained the relevant acknowledgements, Exs.P/25 and P/26. Nothing material was elicited in their cross- examination to discredit the chain of custody. 36. The principal Investigating Officer, Inspector Vikesh Kumar Tiwari (PW-16), deposed that on 31.08.2020 Shailendra Kumar Singh reported the presence of an unidentified male dead body near the Tendu-leaf godown at Khorama, pursuant to which Merg No.87/2020, Ex.P/1, was registered. He visited the spot, prepared the spot map, Ex.P/2, conducted the inquest proceedings and sent the body for postmortem examination. On the basis of the medical opinion that the death was homicidal, Crime No.142/2020 was registered against an unknown person under Section 302 IPC vide Ex.P/36. 37. The Investigating Officer further stated that blood-stained soil, plain soil and blood collected on cotton from the place of occurrence were 15 seized vide Ex.P/9. As the identity of the deceased could not initially be established, proceedings for preservation and burial of the body were conducted. Subsequently, on receiving information from Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, regarding Chitrang Sahu, who had gone towards Pratappur in a Scorpio vehicle and whose mobile phone had become switched off, the relatives of the deceased were informed. Khemalal Sahu, Dushyant Sahu and Bhav Singh came to Pratappur and identified the deceased on the basis of his photograph and the clothes preserved by the police. The identification proceedings were recorded vide Ex.P/3. 38. The Investigating Officer further deposed that, after the identity of the deceased was established, permission for exhumation was obtained from the competent authority and the body was exhumed in the presence of the Naib Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate and the relatives of the deceased. The proceedings were recorded vide Ex.P/4 and, after confirmation of identity, the body was handed over to Bhav Singh under Ex.P/5. He thereafter recorded the statements of the relatives and proceeded to Raipur in search of the persons who had booked the Scorpio vehicle. 39. According to PW-16, during investigation he examined CCTV footage from Raipur and obtained photographs of the persons seen in the footage. The photographs were marked as Articles A-1 to A-17. He also examined CCTV footage and records of hotels in Raipur. At Hotel City Pulse, Raipur, the manager Ashish Kumar Dubey was shown the photographs and stated that three persons had stayed in Room No.102. The hotel register, copies of identification documents and bill were seized 16 vide Ex.P/37. The relevant documents were marked as Articles A-18 to A- 21. 40. PW-16 further stated that the mobile number recorded at the hotel, i.e. 7654406465, was analysed and, on the basis of the call details, other suspicious mobile numbers, namely 7440055185, 9770107103 and 9608072237, were identified. Their locations indicated movement towards Ramanujganj. On reaching the location near the house of Motilal/Moti Ansari, the police found three persons staying there. On being apprehended, they disclosed their names as Sarwar Khan, Shahid Khan and Faizan Khan. The Investigating Officer identified them as the same persons whose presence had been noticed in the CCTV footage. 41. The Investigating Officer further stated that, during interrogation in the presence of witnesses, appellant Sarwar Khan disclosed that he, along with Shahid Khan and Faizan Khan, had assaulted the deceased and thereafter placed his body on the roadside. He further disclosed the manner in which the Scorpio vehicle was taken to Ramanujganj, its original number plates removed, a Bihar registration number affixed, and the hammer and other articles concealed in the rented premises. His memorandum statement was recorded vide Ex.P/10. 42. Pursuant to the memorandum of Sarwar Khan, the Scorpio vehicle and its key were recovered from Village Sukwana, Garhwa, vide Ex.P/16. From the rented premises at Bhuiyatola, Ward No.14, Ramanujganj, a maroon checkered bag containing clothes, two number plates bearing registration No. CG-04/HA-0216, the ATM card of the deceased and a Samsung mobile phone were seized vide Ex.P/15. A hammer was also 17 seized at his instance vide Ex.P/12. 43. Similarly, appellant Shahid Khan made a memorandum statement, Ex.P/11, disclosing the relevant circumstances and the articles concealed by him. Pursuant thereto, a country-made firearm and eight live cartridges were seized vide Ex.P/13. His jeans, shirt, the driving licence of the deceased and a mobile handset were seized vide Ex.P/14. 44. Appellant Faizan Khan also made a memorandum statement, Ex.P/19, in which he disclosed the concealment of the deceased's mobile phone, SIM, footwear and the clothes worn at the time of occurrence, as well as the licence used for identification at Hotel City Pulse. Pursuant thereto, a shirt, the mobile handset of the deceased and the relevant licence and mobile handset were seized vide Ex.P/20. 45. The Investigating Officer further stated that all three appellants were arrested vide arrest memos Exs.P/17, P/18 and P/21. The seized articles were thereafter sent for forensic examination. He also obtained the relevant CDRs and certificates under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act from the concerned service providers vide the correspondence marked Exs.P/41 to P/45. 46. The prosecution case regarding the memorandum statements and recoveries is further supported by Jalim Sai (PW-6). He stated that, after the exhumation proceedings, the police informed him that the accused persons had been traced and requested him to accompany them to Ramanujganj. He went there along with the police and another witness. At the rented premises, Sarwar Khan opened the door. A vehicle number plate was found inside the room. On further search, a hammer, country- 18 made firearm, cartridges and other articles were recovered. The accused persons were thereafter taken to the police station for interrogation. 47. PW-6 further stated that, at the police station, Sarwar Khan disclosed that he had assaulted Chitrang Sahu on the head with a hammer after the country-made firearm failed to function. Shahid Khan also disclosed that the firearm had been provided for use against the deceased, but the assault was ultimately committed with the hammer. Their memorandum statements were recorded vide Exs.P/10 and P/11 and the consequent recoveries were made vide Exs.P/12 and P/13. He further supported the recovery of the mobile phone, ATM card, clothes and number plate vide Exs.P/14 and P/15 and the recovery of the Scorpio vehicle from Garhwa vide Ex.P/16. 48. The evidence of PW-6 regarding the aforesaid memorandum statements and recoveries is substantially corroborated by Prahlad Kumar Gupta (PW-13), who also stated that the memorandum statements of Sarwar Khan and Shahid Khan were recorded in his presence and the recoveries were made pursuant thereto. Though both witnesses did not fully support the prosecution in respect of the memorandum and recovery attributed to Faizan Khan and were declared hostile to that limited extent, they admitted their signatures on Exs.P/19 and P/20. Such limited hostility, particularly when the remaining evidence independently supports the prosecution case, does not render the entire prosecution evidence unreliable. 49. Moti Ansari (PW-2), the landlord of the rented premises at Ramanujganj, also stated that the three appellants were residing as 19 tenants in his house. He further stated that, when the police came to his house and enquired about the appellants, he informed them that they were present there. At the request of the police, he opened the door of their room, whereupon the police apprehended the appellants. Though he did not support the prosecution regarding certain specific articles allegedly found in the room and was declared hostile to that extent, his admission regarding the tenancy of the appellants and their apprehension from his premises remains relevant and lends corroboration to the prosecution case. 50. The electronic evidence also lends corroboration to the prosecution version. Pankaj Rameiya (PW-24), Nodal Support Executive of Vodafone- Idea, stated that mobile No. 7654406465 was issued in the name of Chandni Kumar, resident of Garhwa, Jharkhand, and produced the CDR, CAF and certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act as Exs.P/52 to P/54. Although the number was not registered in the name of any of the appellants, the evidence of the Investigating Officer and the hotel records, particularly the hotel bill, Article A-21, show that the said number was furnished and used by the persons who stayed at Hotel City Pulse. 51. Sanjeev Nema (PW-25), Nodal Officer of Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd., produced the CDRs, CAFs and certificates under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act relating to mobile Nos. 9608072237, 9770107103 and 7440055185. He stated that mobile No. 9770107103 stood in the name of deceased Chitrang Kumar Sahu, mobile No. 9608072237 stood in the name of Faizan Khan, and mobile No. 7440055185 stood in the name of Shahid Khan. The relevant documents were exhibited as Exs.P/55 to P/60. 20 His testimony remained substantially unchallenged in cross-examination. 52. The evidence of PW-24 and PW-25, read with the hotel records and the testimony of PW-16, therefore, corroborates the prosecution case regarding the use of the aforesaid mobile numbers, the presence of the appellants at Hotel City Pulse, their subsequent movement towards Ramanujganj and their eventual apprehension from the rented premises of Moti Ansari. The electronic evidence thus provides an additional link in the chain of circumstances relied upon by the prosecution. 53. It is also significant that the evidence relating to the recovery of the hammer receives further corroboration from the forensic evidence. The forensic examination report, marked as Ex.C/2, records the presence of human blood on the hammer seized pursuant to the memorandum of appellant Sarwar Khan vide Ex.P/12. The said circumstance assumes considerable significance when considered in conjunction with the medical evidence regarding the head injury sustained by the deceased and the evidence identifying the hammer as a possible weapon of assault. 54. Thus, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the contemporaneous documentary evidence, the hotel records, the CCTV material, the electronic evidence, the memorandum statements and consequential recoveries, the recovery of the Scorpio vehicle belonging to the deceased's family, and the forensic evidence are not isolated circumstances. They constitute interlinked circumstances which require consideration cumulatively while examining whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing a complete chain pointing towards the guilt of the appellants. 21 55. We may also make a reference to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C. Chenga Reddy and Ors. v. State of A.P., reported in (1996) 10 SCC 193, wherein it has been observed thus: “In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the settled law is that the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is drawn should be fully proved and such circumstances must be conclusive in nature. Moreover, all the circumstances should be complete and there should be no gap left in the chain of evidence. Further the proved circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence....”. 56. In Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P. and Ors., reported in AIR 1990 SC 79, it was laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that when a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the following tests: “(1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established; (2) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; (3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and 22 (4) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.” 57. In State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, (1992 Crl.LJ 1104), it was pointed out by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that great care must be taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence and if the evidence relied on is reasonably capable of two inferences, the one in favour of the accused must be accepted. It was also pointed out that the circumstances relied upon must be found to have been fully established and the cumulative effect of all the facts so established must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt. 58. Sir Alfred Wills in his admirable book “Wills’ Circumstantial Evidence” (Chapter VI) lays down the following rules specially to be observed in the case of circumstantial evidence: (1) the facts alleged as the basis of any legal inference must be clearly proved and beyond reasonable doubt connected with the factum probandum; (2) the burden of proof is always on the party who asserts the existence of any fact, which infers legal accountability; (3) in all cases, whether of direct or circumstantial evidence the best evidence must be adduced which the nature of the case admits; (4) in order to justify the inference of guilt, the inculpatory facts must be incompatible with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation, upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that of his guilt, (5) if there be any reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused, he is entitled as of right to be acquitted”. 23 59. Five golden principles which constitute Panchseel of proof of case based on circumstantial evidence have been laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 116 which state as under :- “(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned “must” or “should” and not “may be” established; (2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty; (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency; (4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.” 60. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Suresh and Another v State of Haryana, reported in (2018) 18 SCC 654 has observed that cases of circumstantial evidence, the courts are called upon to make inferences from the available evidence, which may lead to the accused's guilt. The court at paras 41 and 42 has observed thus: “41. The aforesaid tests are aptly referred as Panchsheel of proof in Circumstantial Cases 24 (refer to Prakash v. State of Rajasthan). The expectation is that the prosecution case should reflect careful portrayal of the factual circumstances and inferences thereof and their compatibility with a singular hypothesis wherein all the intermediate facts and the case itself are proved beyond reasonable doubt. 42. Circumstantial evidence are those facts, which the court may infer further. There is a stark contrast between direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. In cases of circumstantial evidence, the courts are called upon to make inferences from the available evidence, which may lead to the accused's guilt. In majority of cases, the inference of guilt is usually drawn by establishing the case from its initiation to the point of commission wherein each factual link is ultimately based on evidence of a fact or an inference thereof. Therefore, the courts have to identify the facts in the first place so as to fit the case within the parameters of “chain link theory” and then see whether the case is made out beyond reasonable doubt. In India we have for a long time followed the “chain link theory” since Hanumant case, which of course needs to be followed herein also.” 61. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sailendra Rajdev Pasvan and Others vs. State of Gujarat Etc., reported in AIR 2020 SC 180 observed that in a case of circumstantial evidence, law postulates two-fold requirements. Firstly, that every link in the chain of circumstances necessary to establish the guilt of the accused must be established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt and secondly, all the circumstances 25 must be consistent pointing out only towards the guilt of the accused. We need not burden this judgment by referring to other judgments as the above principles have been consistently followed and approved by this Court time and again. 62. Applying the aforesaid principles to the evidence available on record, the first circumstance which stands firmly established is the identity of the deceased and the homicidal nature of his death. PW-1 Shailendra Kumar Singh had found an unidentified male lying in a blood-stained condition on the roadside near the Tendu-leaf godown at Khorama during the night of 30.08.2020 and had immediately informed the police. The Merg Intimation, Ex.P/1, contemporaneously records the information regarding the unidentified dead body. The evidence of PW-5, PW-6, PW- 11 and PW-19 further establishes the inquest, burial and subsequent exhumation proceedings. The deceased was thereafter identified by his relatives on the basis of his photograph and clothes, and the identification proceedings were duly recorded vide Ex.P/3. Thus, there is no serious doubt either regarding the identity of the deceased or regarding the fact that his death was homicidal. 63. The next circumstance, which assumes considerable significance, is that immediately before the occurrence the deceased had left Raipur in Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04/HA-0216 along with the appellants. PW-21 Dushyant Kumar Sahu, the owner of the vehicle, has specifically stated that the deceased had been engaged to drive the Scorpio on booking and that on 30.08.2020 he left Raipur with the appellants towards Ambikapur. His testimony is corroborated by the 26 documentary evidence relating to ownership of the vehicle, namely Ex.P/33. Thereafter, the deceased could not be contacted and his mobile phone remained switched off. This circumstance assumes importance because the deceased was thereafter found dead within the very period during which he had been travelling with the appellants. 64. The subsequent conduct and movement of the appellants provide a further connecting link. The Investigating Officer, PW-16, traced the persons who had stayed at Hotel City Pulse, Raipur, by examining CCTV footage, hotel records and the relevant mobile-number data. The hotel register, identification documents and bill were seized vide Ex.P/37. The investigation thereafter disclosed movement of the relevant mobile numbers towards Ramanujganj. The appellants were ultimately found together at the rented premises of Moti Ansari. PW-2, the landlord, has admitted that the three appellants were residing as tenants in his premises and that they were apprehended there by the police. Thus, the presence of the appellants at the relevant places is not founded merely upon the assertion of the Investigating Officer but receives independent corroboration from the hotel and tenancy evidence. 65. The most significant incriminating circumstance is the recovery of the articles connected with the deceased and the occurrence. Pursuant to the memorandum of Sarwar Khan, Ex.P/10, the Scorpio vehicle was recovered from Village Sukwana, Garhwa, vide Ex.P/16. From the rented premises, the original number plates of the said Scorpio bearing registration No. CG-04/HA-0216, the ATM card of the deceased and his mobile phone, amongst other articles, were recovered vide Ex.P/15. The 27 recovery of the very vehicle in which the deceased had left Raipur, together with its original number plates and articles belonging to the deceased, cannot be treated as a circumstance having no connection with the occurrence. The prosecution has thus established a direct evidentiary link between the appellants, the deceased and the vehicle in which the deceased had last been seen travelling. 66. The recovery of the weapon also materially strengthens the prosecution case. Pursuant to the memorandum of Sarwar Khan, a hammer was recovered vide Ex.P/12. PW-6 and PW-13 have substantially supported the memorandum and recovery proceedings concerning Sarwar Khan. More importantly, the forensic report, Ex.C/2, records the presence of human blood on the hammer. This forensic circumstance assumes significance when read with the medical evidence regarding the head injuries suffered by the deceased and the evidence concerning the assault with a hammer. The recovery is, therefore, not merely a recovery of an ordinary article but is supported by an independent forensic circumstance connecting the recovered weapon with the homicidal occurrence. 67. The memorandum and recovery attributed to Shahid Khan also constitute a relevant circumstance. Pursuant to Ex.P/11, a country-made firearm and eight live cartridges were recovered vide Ex.P/13, besides other articles. PW-6 and PW-13 have substantially corroborated this part of the prosecution case. Although PW-6 and PW-13 did not fully support the prosecution regarding certain aspects attributed to Faizan Khan, their limited hostility does not obliterate the evidence which they have otherwise given consistently regarding the material recoveries from Sarwar Khan and 28 Shahid Khan. The Court is required to assess the evidence on its intrinsic worth and is not required to reject the entire testimony of a witness merely because he has not supported the prosecution on every aspect of the case. 68. The electronic evidence provides another independent link. PW-24 proved the CDR, CAF and certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act concerning mobile No. 7654406465, while PW-25 proved the corresponding records concerning mobile Nos. 9608072237, 9770107103 and 7440055185. The evidence establishes that one of the numbers stood in the name of the deceased, while other numbers stood in the names of Faizan Khan and Shahid Khan. When this evidence is read along with the hotel records, CCTV material, the testimony of PW-16 and the subsequent presence of the appellants at Ramanujganj, it provides corroboration to the prosecution case regarding the movement and presence of the appellants in the relevant period. 69. We are conscious of the fact that the prosecution case does not rest upon direct eyewitness testimony of the actual assault and is founded substantially upon circumstantial evidence. It is equally well settled that in such a case each circumstance must be independently established and all the proved circumstances must thereafter be considered cumulatively. In the present case, however, the circumstances do not operate in isolation. The deceased was last travelling with the appellants; he thereafter became uncontactable; within the relevant period his homicidally injured body was found at Khorama; the appellants were subsequently traced through CCTV, hotel and electronic evidence; they were found together at 29 Ramanujganj; the vehicle in which the deceased had travelled was recovered; the original number plates and articles belonging to the deceased were recovered from the premises connected with the appellants; a hammer was recovered pursuant to the disclosure of Sarwar Khan; and human blood was detected on that hammer. 70. The cumulative effect of these circumstances is of considerable evidentiary force. The prosecution is not relying upon a single circumstance or merely upon the alleged disclosure statements of the appellants. The case is supported by contemporaneous documentary evidence, independent witnesses, hotel records, CCTV material, electronic evidence, recovery of the vehicle and articles belonging to the deceased, recovery of the alleged weapon and forensic evidence. The circumstances therefore receive assurance from one another and substantially corroborate the prosecution version. 71. It is also significant that the recoveries of the deceased's vehicle, original number plates, mobile phone and ATM card were not made from an entirely open and public place unconnected with the appellants. They were recovered pursuant to the investigation leading to the premises where the appellants had been residing and/or at their instance. The nature of the articles recovered, particularly the vehicle in which the deceased had travelled immediately before his disappearance and the personal articles of the deceased, gives the recoveries substantial probative value. The defence has not furnished any satisfactory or plausible explanation as to how such articles came to be in the possession or control of the appellants after the deceased's homicidal death. 30 72. The minor discrepancies or omissions elicited in cross-examination, particularly regarding peripheral aspects of the recovery proceedings, do not affect the core of the prosecution case. It is not every discrepancy which creates a reasonable doubt. The Court has to distinguish between contradictions going to the root of the prosecution case and discrepancies relating to matters of detail. In the present case, the material circumstances relating to the deceased's last journey, his subsequent death, the tracing of the appellants, their presence together, recovery of the vehicle and articles belonging to the deceased, recovery of the hammer and the forensic finding remain substantially intact. 73. We are, therefore, of the considered view that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the material circumstances beyond reasonable doubt. These circumstances, when considered cumulatively, form a continuous chain in which the links are mutually corroborative and point towards the involvement of the appellants in the commission of the offence. The circumstances established on record are inconsistent with the reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the appellants and are consistent with the prosecution hypothesis that the appellants were involved in the homicidal assault upon Chitrang Sahu and in the subsequent concealment/removal of the vehicle and articles connected with him. 74. The defence has not been able to break any material link in the chain. No plausible alternative explanation has been furnished for the possession/recovery of the deceased's vehicle and personal articles, the presence of the appellants together at the relevant place, their movements 31 immediately following the disappearance of the deceased, or the recovery of the hammer containing human blood. The cumulative effect of the established circumstances, therefore, does not leave a reasonable ground for an inference consistent with the innocence of the appellants. 75. Consequently, on an overall appreciation of the oral, documentary, electronic and forensic evidence, and applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C. Chenga Reddy (supra), Padala Veera Reddy (supra), Ashok Kumar Srivastava (supra), Sharad Birdhichand Sarda (supra), Suresh (supra) and Sailendra Rajdev Pasvan (supra), we hold that the prosecution has established a complete chain of circumstances pointing unerringly towards the guilt of the appellants and excluding every reasonable hypothesis consistent with their innocence. 76. We consequently find no reason to take a different view from that taken by the learned trial Court. The findings recorded by the learned trial Court are supported by the evidence available on record and do not suffer from perversity, illegality or any material infirmity warranting interference in appellate jurisdiction. The prosecution has succeeded in proving the charges against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. 77. Consequently, the appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellants by judgment dated 15.05.2025 passed by the learned trial Court are hereby affirmed. 78. It is reported that the appellants are in custody. They shall serve out the remaining part of the sentence imposed upon them by the learned trial Court, subject to adjustment of the period already undergone and any 32 other benefit available to them in accordance with law. 79. In view of the disposal of the present appeal on merits, I.A. No.1 of 2025, filed on behalf of the appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, no longer survives for consideration and stands disposed of accordingly. 80. The learned trial court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. 81. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail term, 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 the High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan