1 CGHC010044372023 2026:CGHC:34458-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 310 of 2023 Manik Ram Dhruv S/o Hariram Dhruv Aged About 39 Years R/o Hasda No. 02, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant (s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board 06/08/2026 Per, Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice. 1 The present criminal appeal is listed today for final hearing before this Court. When the matter was called for hearing, it was observed that the appeal had earlier been assigned to Ms. Mandavi Bharadwaj, Advocate, through the Legal Aid Panel. However, she was not present to argue the matter. Upon being asked, she submitted that she is no SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2026.08.10 11:17:15 +0530 2 longer empanelled with the Legal Aid Panel, has already returned the case file, and, therefore, has no instructions to appear or argue the present appeal. 2 In view of the above, this Court appoints Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate, who is present in Court, as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court and argue the present appeal. 3 The present appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.12.2022 passed by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, Dist- Raipur (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.246/2019, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code R.I for Life and fine amount of Rs. 500/-, in default of fine amount additional R.I. for 03 months. 4 Brief facts of the case are that, on 17.07.2019 at about 07:00 a.m., near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple at Village Palaud, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur, the appellant allegedly poured petrol upon Smt. Kanti Bai Dhruv while she was proceeding to take a bath along with her daughter and thereafter set her on fire by igniting a matchstick, as a result of which she sustained extensive burn injuries. She was initially admitted to Krishna Hospital, Raipur and thereafter shifted to D.K.S. Super Speciality Hospital, Raipur, where she succumbed to her burn injuries on 21.07.2019 during treatment. On receiving information regarding the death, the police registered Merg Intimation and, upon enquiry, FIR bearing Crime No.363/2019 was registered at Police 3 Station Abhanpur for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. During investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared the inquest over the dead body and sent it for post-mortem examination. Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi (PW-17) conducted the post- mortem examination and opined that the deceased had sustained extensive ante-mortem burn injuries and that the cause of death was cardio-respiratory failure resulting from burn injuries and their complications, and that the death was homicidal in nature. The Investigating Officer prepared the spot map, seized a burnt jute sack, partially burnt saree of the deceased and burnt matchsticks smelling of petrol from the place of occurrence. Memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded, pursuant to which a TVS Wego scooter, a tin container smelling of petrol, a plastic pipe and a matchbox were recovered and seized. The seized articles were forwarded to the State Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination, and as per the FSL report, traces of petrol were detected on the seized articles, including the burnt saree, burnt jute sack, matchsticks, tin container and plastic pipe. 5 The statements of the prosecution witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded during the course of investigation. Upon completion of the usual investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur. As the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Raipur, where it was registered as Sessions Trial 4 No.246/2019 and made over to the Court of the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur for trial. 6 The learned trial Court framed charge against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. 7 In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was also recorded, wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, pleaded innocence, stated that he had been falsely implicated in the case and did not examine any witness in defence. 8 After appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted and sentenced him accordingly, as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.12.2022 passed by the learned trial court, the appellant has preferred the present criminal appeal. 9 Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. It is contended that the conviction recorded by the learned trial Court is contrary to the evidence available on record and is based upon interested and related witnesses. It is further submitted that no independent witness has supported the prosecution version and the so-called eyewitnesses are interested witnesses against whom 5 previous enmity existed with the appellant. Learned counsel would further argue that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, which have been ignored by the trial Court. It is also contended that the alleged recovery of the incriminating articles at the instance of the appellant is doubtful, as the seizure witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. It is further argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the involvement of the appellant by cogent and reliable evidence and the appellant has been convicted merely on the basis of assumptions and presumptions. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are unsustainable in law and deserve to be set aside, and the appellant is entitled to be acquitted of the charge. 10 Per contra, learned counsel for the State supports the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and submits that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt. It is contended that the prosecution has adduced cogent and reliable ocular, medical and scientific evidence establishing the guilt of the appellant. Learned State counsel would submit that the testimony of Komalchand Sahu (PW-1), an eyewitness to the incident, is natural, trustworthy and stands duly corroborated by the evidence of Chandani @ Chetna Dhruv (PW-8), the child witness and daughter of the deceased, who categorically deposed that she had witnessed the appellant pouring petrol on her mother and setting her ablaze. Their testimony is further corroborated by the evidence of the relatives of the deceased regarding the oral dying declaration made by the deceased immediately after the incident. It is further submitted that the medical evidence of Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi (PW-17) and Dr. Dakshesh R. 6 Shah (PW-12) conclusively establishes that the deceased died due to extensive ante-mortem burn injuries and the complications arising therefrom. Learned State counsel would further submit that, pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant, the scooter, petrol tin, plastic pipe and matchbox were recovered, and the FSL report confirmed the presence of petrol residues on the seized articles, thereby lending assurance to the prosecution case. It is thus argued that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the entire evidence on record and has rightly convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence does not suffer from any illegality or perversity warranting interference by this Court and deserves to be affirmed. 11 We have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the records of the case. 12 The first and foremost question that arises for consideration would be the nature of the death of the deceased as to whether his death was homicidal or not. 13 The homicidal death of the deceased Kanti Bai Dhruv has been duly established by the prosecution from the evidence available on record. The prosecution has proved that after sustaining extensive burn injuries, the deceased was initially admitted to Shri Krishna Hospital and thereafter shifted to D.K.S. Super Speciality Hospital, Raipur, where she succumbed to her injuries on 21.07.2019. Dr. Mayank Devangan (PW-14) has deposed that the deceased had sustained about 75% burn injuries when she was first brought to the hospital and proved the hospital intimation. Dr. Dakshesh R. Shah (PW-12), who 7 treated the deceased at D.K.S. Hospital, has stated that she remained admitted from 17.07.2019 till her death on 21.07.2019 and proved the bed-head ticket (Ex.P-10), opining that she died due to burn injuries and the complications arising therefrom. The inquest over the dead body was conducted by Assistant Sub-Inspector (PW-16), who proved the inquest proceedings (Ex.P-9). Further, Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi (PW-17), who conducted the postmortem examination and proved the postmortem report (Ex.P-27), found extensive ante-mortem infected burn injuries over most parts of the body. On internal examination, he noticed burn injuries and associated pathological changes in the internal organs and categorically opined that the death was caused due to cardio-respiratory failure resulting from ante-mortem burn injuries and the complications arising therefrom. He further opined that the burn injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross- examination to discredit his medical opinion. Thus, the prosecution has successfully established that the deceased Kanti Bai Dhruv died a homicidal death. 14 So far as the involvement of the appellant in the offence in question is concerned, the prosecution case is founded upon the direct ocular testimony of the eyewitnesses, corroborated by the oral dying declarations made by the deceased and the medical as well as forensic evidence. 15 Komal Chand Sahu (PW-1), an eyewitness to the occurrence, has categorically deposed that on the date of the incident, at about 6:30– 7:00 a.m., he came out of his house on hearing abuses and saw the appellant standing near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple. He 8 witnessed the appellant pouring petrol upon the deceased Kanti Bai Dhruv and setting her ablaze by igniting a matchstick. He further stated that the deceased, while engulfed in flames, ran towards him crying for help, whereupon he extinguished the fire by covering her with a jute sack, while the appellant fled from the spot on his motorcycle. His testimony finds corroboration from Durga Sahu (PW-2), who reached the spot immediately after hearing the cries of the deceased and wrapped her with a saree before taking her towards her parental home. Chandani @ Chetna Dhruv (PW-8), the minor daughter of the deceased, has also deposed that while she was accompanying her mother to the canal, the appellant poured petrol on her mother and ignited it with a matchstick, whereafter she immediately ran to inform her grandmother about the incident. Her version is duly corroborated by Dhansir Bai (PW-3), Takeshwar (PW-5), Somnath Dhruv (PW-6) and Kolhu Dhruv (PW-7), who have consistently stated that Chandani @ Chetna Dhruv (PW-8) returned home immediately after the occurrence and informed them that the appellant had poured petrol upon her mother. Dhansir Bai (PW-3), the mother of the deceased, and Mana Bai Dhruv (PW-10), the sister of the deceased, have further deposed that when they enquired from the deceased during her treatment, she disclosed that it was the appellant who had poured petrol upon her and set her on fire. The prosecution case is further strengthened by the recovery of a petrol-smelling jute sack, burnt saree, burnt matchsticks, and, pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant, the seizure of the TVS Wego motorcycle, a tin container smelling of petrol, a plastic pipe and a matchbox. The FSL report also confirmed the presence of petrol residues on the seized articles. Thus, the ocular 9 account, the oral dying declarations, the recoveries and the scientific evidence form a complete chain of circumstances proving beyond reasonable doubt that it was the appellant who poured petrol on the deceased and set her ablaze, resulting in her death. 16 From the perusal of the Crime Details Form (Ex.P-11) prepared during investigation and the spot map (Ex.P-16) prepared by the Patwari, it is evident that the place of occurrence was situated near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple at Village Palaud, where the deceased sustained burn injuries. The evidence of Investigating Officer Assistant Sub- Inspector (PW-16) further reveals that during the course of investigation, a jute sack smelling of petrol, which had been used to extinguish the fire, the partially burnt saree worn by the deceased and two half-burnt matchsticks smelling of petrol were seized from the spot vide seizure memos Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-2. The Investigating Officer has further proved that, pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant (Ex.P-5), a TVS Wego motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-07-AM-4303, a tin container smelling of petrol, a plastic pipe and a matchbox were recovered and seized vide (Ex.P-6). The FSL report (Ex.P-25) confirmed the presence of petrol residues on the seized articles, including the jute sack, burnt saree, burnt matchsticks, tin container, plastic pipe and matchbox. Thus, the evidence on record clearly establishes the place of occurrence and lends complete corroboration to the prosecution case that the appellant poured petrol upon the deceased and set her ablaze at the place of incident. 17 PW-9 Rajesh Kumar Sahu is one of the witnesses to the seizure proceedings and the memorandum of the appellant. However, he turned hostile and did not fully support the prosecution case regarding 10 the memorandum and recovery proceedings. Though he turned hostile, he admitted his signatures on the seizure memos Ex.P-1, Ex.P-2 and Ex.P-6 as well as on the memorandum statement Ex.P-5. He further admitted that the police had shown him the TVS Wego motorcycle, the plastic pipe and the tin container and informed him that the said articles had been seized from the appellant. Similarly, (PW-13) Bihari Lal Sahu, another witness to the memorandum and seizure proceedings, also turned hostile and denied that the memorandum statement and recoveries were made in his presence. Nevertheless, he admitted his signatures on the memorandum statement (Ex.P-5) and the seizure memos (Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-6). Thus, although both the witnesses did not fully support the prosecution case, their admission of signatures on the relevant documents lends support to the fact that the memorandum and seizure proceedings were carried out by the Investigating Officer. 18 (PW-15) Yashwant Kumar Pathare, Patwari, is a witness to the spot- related proceedings. He has deposed that, on the requisition made by the Investigating Officer, he inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the spot map (Ex.P-16), depicting the place of incident situated near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple at Village Palaud. Further, (PW-16) Assistant Sub-Inspector, the Investigating Officer, has deposed that during the course of investigation, he seized a jute sack smelling of petrol, the partially burnt saree of the deceased and two half-burnt matchsticks smelling of petrol vide seizure memos Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-2. His evidence further establishes that the seized articles were sent for forensic examination, and the FSL report confirmed the presence of petrol residues on the said articles, thereby lending corroboration to the prosecution case. 11 19 (PW-3) Dhansir Bai is the mother of the deceased. She has deposed that on the date of the incident, the deceased Kanti Bai had gone towards the canal for taking bath along with her daughter Chandani. The appellant was standing near the place of occurrence with his motorcycle. Shortly thereafter, Chandani returned home and informed her that the appellant had sprinkled petrol upon her mother. When she reached the spot, she found the deceased in a burnt condition and thereafter accompanied her to the hospital. She has further stated that during treatment, on being asked about the incident, the deceased disclosed that it was the appellant who had poured petrol upon her and set her on fire. 20 (PW-5) Takeshwar, the brother of the deceased, has also deposed that Chandani rushed back to the house and informed the family members that the appellant had poured petrol upon her mother near the village temple. His evidence further shows that the deceased was immediately taken to the hospital after sustaining burn injuries. PW-6 Somnath Dhruv, another brother of the deceased, has corroborated the testimony of PW-5 by stating that Chandani informed the family members that the appellant had sprinkled petrol upon the deceased and thereafter the injured was brought back to the house before being shifted to the hospital. 21 Likewise, PW-7 Kolhu Dhruv, the father of the deceased, has also deposed that Chandani informed him that the appellant had poured petrol upon her mother, and when the deceased was brought home, she was completely burnt. Thus, the evidence of these witnesses consistently establishes the immediate conduct of the child witness 12 after the occurrence and corroborates the prosecution case regarding the identity of the assailant. 22 PW-10 Mana Bai Dhruv, the sister of the deceased, has deposed that the deceased had been residing at her parental home as her husband was addicted to liquor and that the appellant, being the husband of her younger sister, often objected to the deceased residing at her parental house, thereby furnishing the motive for the occurrence. She has further stated that when she met the deceased in the hospital and enquired about the incident, the deceased informed her that it was the appellant who had set her ablaze by pouring petrol upon her. 23 From the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, particularly Komal Chand Sahu (PW-1), Chandani @ Chetna Dhruv (PW-8), Dhansir Bai (PW-3), Takeshwar (PW-5), Somnath Dhruv (PW-6) and Kolhu Dhruv (PW-7), coupled with the spot maps (Ex.P-11 and Ex.P-16), it transpires that the occurrence took place near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple at Village Palaud when the deceased was proceeding towards the canal along with her daughter. The prosecution has consistently established that the appellant poured petrol upon the deceased and set her ablaze at the said place, whereafter she was shifted to the hospital and ultimately succumbed to the burn injuries during treatment. The seizure of the burnt saree, jute sack, burnt matchsticks and other incriminating articles from the place of occurrence, along with the FSL report confirming the presence of petrol residues thereon, lends further corroboration to the prosecution case. Though the appellant, in his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded false implication, he did not furnish any plausible explanation regarding 13 the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, nor did he adduce any defence evidence to probabilise any alternative version of the occurrence. Consequently, the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the involvement of the appellant in the commission of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. 24 From the overall facts and circumstances of the case, what clearly emerges is that the deceased Kanti Bai Dhruv sustained extensive burn injuries near the Shiv and Bajrang Bali Temple at Village Palaud while she was proceeding towards the canal with her daughter. The ocular testimony of Komal Chand Sahu (PW-1), an independent eyewitness, and Chandani @ Chetna Dhruv (PW-8), the child witness who was accompanying the deceased at the time of the occurrence, consistently establishes that it was the appellant who poured petrol upon the deceased and set her ablaze by igniting a matchstick. Their testimony finds substantial corroboration from the evidence of Dhansir Bai (PW-3) and Mana Bai Dhruv (PW-10), before whom the deceased made oral dying declarations implicating the appellant, as well as from the medical evidence of Dr. Dakshesh R. Shah (PW-12), Dr. Mayank Devangan (PW-14) and Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi (PW-17), who have proved that the deceased died on account of ante-mortem burn injuries and the complications arising therefrom. The prosecution case is further fortified by the recovery of the petrol-smelling jute sack, burnt saree, burnt matchsticks and, pursuant to the memorandum statement of the appellant, the seizure of the motorcycle, petrol container, plastic pipe and matchbox, all of which were found to contain petrol residues as per the FSL report (Ex.P-25). Although the appellant, in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 14 denied the incriminating circumstances and pleaded false implication, he failed to offer any plausible explanation for the overwhelming ocular, medical and scientific evidence adduced against him and did not lead any defence evidence to probabilise his plea. Thus, the evidence on record forms a complete and consistent chain establishing beyond reasonable doubt that it was the appellant who poured petrol upon the deceased and set her ablaze, resulting in her death. 25 In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. The appellant is reported to be in jail since 23.07.2019. He shall undergo the remaining part of the sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court. 26 Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his 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. 27 The records of the case along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice sagrika