1 CGHC010109562023 2026:CGHC:37310-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 747 of 2023 1 - Vinod Tirkey Tirkey S/o Premlal Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Koda, Thihai Para, Police Station Jhagrakhand, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh 2 - Sarju Panika Panika S/o Gyan Panika Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Koda, Thihai Para, Police Station Jhagrakhand, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ajak Baikunthpur, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (cause title taken from CIS) For Appellant (s) : Mr. Om Prakash Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashish Shukla, Addl. A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 20.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Ashish Shukla, Addl. Advocate General for the Respondent/ State. 2. The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A)(a) of SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2026.08.29 13:50:47 +0530 2 Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 (in short SC/ST Act) by the appellants against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 20.02.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Baikunthpur, in Special Criminal Case No. 46/2019 whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- S.No Conviction Sentence 1. Under Section 366 of IPC. R.I. for 07 years and fine of Rs. 200/- in default of fine additional S.I. for 01 month to each appellants. 2. Under Section 376-D of IPC Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/- in default of fine, Additiona S.I. for 01 month to each appellants. 3. Under Section 307 of IPC. R.I. for 07 years and fine of Rs. 200/- in default of fine Additional S.I. for 01 month to each appellants. 4. Under Section 3 (2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/- in default of fine Additional S.I. for 01 months to appellant No. 2. (All the sentences shall run concurrently) 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 13.10.2019, the victim (PW/1) lodged a report to the Police Station, Manendragrah Camp that on 12.10.2019 at about 6 PM, when she was cleaning utensils in her badi, the appellants came to her through badi, covered her face by towel and tied her hands by backside. Thereafter, both of them dragged her towards Koda Jungle, where the appellant Vinod Tirkey 3 committed rape upon her. The appellant Sarju Panika assisted him in committing rape upon her. After committing rape, both of them assaulted her by stone and thrown her on the floor, they torned her cloths, prepared a ligature and hanged her in a tree. Since the ligature was broken, she fell down in the pit and thereafter, she ran towards river and in the morning, she took shelter in the house situated near jungle and informed the persons of that house about the incident and then she informed the incident to her parents who took her with them and then, she lodged the report. The Dehati Nalasi (Ex-P/1) was recorded by the Police against the accused persons and then FIR (Ex- P/16) was also registered for the offence under Section 365, 376(2)(n) , 307 and 109 of IPC and Section 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST Act. The victim was sent for her medical examination to Community Health Centre, Manendragarh, where she was medically examined by PW/4 Dr. Archana Kumhare, who gave her report (Ex-P/08). While medically examined the victim, she noticed certain injuries on her body and opined that signs of recent sexual intercourse found on the body of the victim. Two slides of her vaginal swab were prepared, sealed and handed over to the Police for its chemical examination. Spot map (Ex- P/3) was prepared by the Police and (Ex-P/7) was prepared by the Patwari. The torn cloths of the victim has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/4). The social status report of the victim (Ex-P/6) has also been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/5), in which it has been certified that the victim belongs to Schedule Tribe community. At the time when the victim was being taken to hospital by her parents, the doctor Surendra Singh (PW/12) suspected that she was subjected to rape and he 4 informed it to the Police vide memo dated 13.10.2019 (Ex-P/18). When she was being taken to hospital, the doctor has also been requested to give the mental condition of the vcitim as to whether she is able to give her statement or not, then the doctor opined that the victim is in speaking condition and the said report is (Ex-P/19). The Police were arrested on 13.10.2019 and the memorandum statement of the appellant Vinod Tirkey (Ex-P/10) was recorded. Based on his memorandum statement, the torn piece of cloth of victim has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/11). The underwear of the appellants have also been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/23). From the spot one ladies chappal and one towel has also been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/24). The said towel was identified by the witnesses that it belongs to the accused Vinod Tirkey and identification Panchanama (Ex-P/32) was prepared. The underwear of the victim, vaginal slides, underwear of the appellant Vinod Tirkey, his semen slides, the torn piece of cloth of the victim and towel were sent for its chemical examination to Regional FSL Ambikapur, Dist- Sarguja, from where report (Ex-P/29 and P/30) was received and as per the FSL report (Ex- P/29), human blood was found on the torn piece of cloth of the victim and towel seized from the spot identified as belonging to appellant Vinod Tirkey. As per the FSL report (Ex-P/30), semen and sperms were found on underwear of the victim, her vaginal slides, underwear of the appellant Vinod Tirkey and his semen slides . The ligature was also sent to doctor for its query report, who gave his query report (Ex-P/9) and opined that the death might be possible if the ligature would not have been broken. Injury found on the neck of the victim would have been caused due to hang and for confirmation of presence of blood, 5 the articles were referred for its chemical examination. Statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. have been recorded. After completion of the investigation, the Police filed a charge-sheet against the appellants for the offences under Sections 365, 376 (2)(n), 307, 109 and 376-D of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. 4. The learned trial Court framed charges against appellant Vinod Tirkey for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376-D, 307 of IPC, whereas the charge framed against the appellant Sarju Panika for the offence under Section 366, 376-D, 307 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. The appellants abjured his guilt and claimed trial. 5. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. The statements of the appellants under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were also recorded, wherein they denied circumstances appearing against them, pleaded innocence, and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case. 6. After appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced them as has been mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment, hence this appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omission and contradictions which cannot be made basis to convict the appellants for the offence in question. The evidence of the victim is shaky and she gave inconsistent statement with respect to the alleged incident. Further a totally impossible story has been developed by the victim against the appellants. He would further submit that there is no allegation against the appellant No. 2 Sarju Panika that he also 6 committed rape upon the victim and the allegation of rape is only against the appellant No. 1 Vinod Tirkey. Therefore, the appellants cannot be convicted for the offence of gang rape. He would further submit that there exist a dispute with respect to the wages of the appellants which has not been paid by the father of the victim as the appellants worked as laborer in the under construction house of the father of the victim but has not paid the wages and avoid his liability to pay wages, the father of the victim made her instrumental and lodged the report. There are material contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses and the appellants are entitled for benefit of doubt and therefore, by giving them the benefit of doubt they may be acquitted. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and have submitted that but for minor omission and contradictions, the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses are fully reliable and the prosecution has duly proved its case beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants kidnapped the victim, committed rape upon her and tried to kill her by hanging on the tree. The FIR has been lodged in the very next day of the incident naming the present appellants as the accused persons. The appellants could not demonstrate as to the period for which the wages were due and what transpired immediately before the alleged incident. The victim has categorically deposed in her evidence about the manner and conduct in which she sufferrd the offence of rape and attempt to commit her murder by the accused persons. The evidence of the victim is duly supported by the medical evidence and FSL report. Injuries have been found on the body of the victim and doctor has also opined that she was subjected to rape and in the FSL report human 7 blood and semen were found on her vaginal slides and underwear. All these facts and evidences, unerrengily demonstrates that the victim suffered the offence of gang rape by the appellants. Although, the allegation of sexual intercourse is not against the appellant No. 2 Sarju Panika but there is positive allegation that he assisted and actively participated in facilitating the commission of rape by the appellant Vinod Tirkey upon the victim, thus, the alleged offence have duly established against the appellants and the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and has convicted and sentence them. There is no infirmity or illegality in the judgment passed by learned trial Court and the appeal filed by the appellants are liable to be dismissed. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the appeal. 10.The victim (PW/1) has stated in her evidence that she knew the appellants. The Appellant Vinod Tirkey belongs to other backward classes and she belongs to ‘Kol’ community which comes under the ab-urban tribes. On the date of incident, when she was cleaning utensils in her badi, the appellant Vinod Tirkey came from her backside and covered her face by towel. The appellant Sarju Panika came from front side and both of them dragged her towards jungle. She raised her alarm when they were dragging her. In the jungle, they tied her hands by towel, both of them were caught her hold, the appellant Vinod Tirkey assaulted her by stone near her eyes by which she received injury on her right eye and her vision is lost. The appellant Vinod Tirkey committed rape upon her trice during that the appellant Sarju Panika caught her hold. The appellant Vinod Tirkey torned her cloths and 8 thereafter, both of them took her about 20 meter near the pit and after making ligature by the torn cloths, they tied it to a tree and through her towards pit, so that she could die. Fortunately, the ligature made from the cloths were broken and she fell down in the pit. She ran up to 1 and half kilo meter by the river side and hide herself throughout the night and in the morning, she reached in the house of PW/3. She informed the incident to him and then he informed the incident to her parents. Thereafter, all of them came to the house of PW/3 and then she was being taken to hospital by her parents and other members of the village. Her report has been recorded by the Police which is (Ex-P/1). She admitted in the Manendragarh hospital for about a week and thereafter, she was shifted to Baikunthpur hospital, there she also remained for about a week and then she was discharged. She duly supported the investigation and recovery is made in her presence. She further stated that the appellant Vinod Tirkey asked her for sexual favour but she denied, for that reason, he tried to kill her. About two years back, he outrage her modesty for which also she lodged the report to the Police. In cross-examination, the defence has given the suggestion that her father has not paid the wages to the appellants towards the work of labourer done by the appellants in his under construction house which she denied. She firmly denied in cross-examination that the appellant Vinod Tirkey has not committed rape upon her and the appellant Sarju Panika has not assited and actively participated in the act of Vinod Tirkey. The defence could not be able to extract any material to the evidence to disbelieve her rather she firmly and consistently denied the suggestion given by the defence and supported 9 the prosecution’s case. From perusal of the Dehati Nalasi (Ex-P/1) and her evidence before the court, we find no exaggeration or contradictions of this evidence. In the manner the victim gave her evidence, she can be put in the platform of sterling witness as there is no discrepancies in her evidence. 11.From the nature and quality of the evidence produced by the prosecution, the victim cannot be considered to be a sterling witness as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Santosh Prasad alias Santosh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in 2020 (3) SCC 443 has held in para 5.4.2. that:- 5.4.2. In Rai Sandeep, this Court had an occasion to consider who can be said to be a "sterling witness". In para 22, it is observed and held as under (SCC p. 29) "22. In our considered opinion, the "sterling witness" should be of a very high quality and calibre whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the 10 persons involved, as well as the sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each and every one of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a witness can be called as a "sterling witness" whose version can be accepted by the court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged" 12.PW/2, who is the mother of the victim, has stated in her evidence that on the date of incident, her daughter was cleaning utensils outside of the badi and after sometime when they could not find the victim in the house, they started searching her. In the next morning, PW/3, came to her house and informed about the victim and then they accompanied him towards his house. When she saw her daughter, she was injured and having injuries on her eyes and neck and then she informed her about the incident of rape by the appellants and hanged her in a tree. She duly supported the evidence of the victim. In cross-examination, 11 the suggestion given by the defence that they have unpaid the wages to the appellant to the work done by them in her under construction house, but she denied. From her evidence also, the prosecution has proved that when PW/3 informed the parents of the victim, they immediately rush to his house, found the victim there and she informed her about the incident and then they immediately lodged the report. 13.PW/12, Dr. Surendra Singh, who medically examined the victim at Community Health Centre, Manendragarh, he stated in his evidence that on 13.10.2019 at about 10 AM, the victim was being taken to him for her treatment. He found the injuries on her face and her neck. Her parents have been informed that she was being assaulted by someone and thereafter, he admitted her in the hospital. He suspected that she was subjected to rape and therefore, he sent the memo to Police which is (Ex-P/18). He also medically examined the appellant Vinod Tirkey and found him capable to perform sexual intercourse and gave his report (Ex-P/22). 14.PW/3, who is the person in whose house the victim reached in the morning. He stated in his evidence that on the date of incident at about 5 AM, he and his wife heard the noise of a girl and when they came out from the house, they saw the victim and she was in her undergarments only. Injuries were found on her face and on being asked, she disclosed her father’s name. She also disclosed about the incident which she suffered since last night. He informed the parents of the victim and then her parents came there and took her to Police Station. In cross-examination, the defence gave suggestion that the victim received injuries due to fall on the rough surface, but he denied and deposed that the victim was being assaulted by stone and she was 12 being tried to hang through the tree. The substantive evidence of this evidence that in the morning, they saw the victim in her undergarments, she was crying and then she informed about the entire incident, which she suffered since last night, could not be rebutted by the defence in his cross-examination and his evidence has fully corroborated by the evidence of victim (PW/1) and her mother (PW/2). 15.(PW/4), Dr. Archana Kumhare who medically examined the victim, has stated in her evidence that on 13.10.2019 she medically examined the victim and found the following injuries :- • Contusion on right eye region. • Abrasion on rightside of forehead region. • Teethbite mark on right cheek region. • Contusion on mid neck region below mendible. • Contusion on right side of neck region, injury no. 4 and 5 are caused by abrasion by blunt object and soft object. • Abrasion on right knee region. • Abrasion on right foot. • Scratches in left middle aspect of left thaigh region and mid of leg region On internal examination, she noticed the hymen was torned with readiness and contusion, tenderness present and she opined the signs of resent sexual intercourse were found. Two slides of her vaginal semen were prepared, sealed and handed over to the Police for its chemical examination. She proved her report (Ex-P/8). She also proved the query report (Ex-P/9) by which she opined that the death could be possible by the said ligature and the injury present on the neck is 13 possible due to hanging. In her cross-examination, the defence has put the question only that whether she sent the cloths for its chemical examination which she answered that she sent the cloths for its chemical examination through the constable in sealed condition and admitted that the injury found on the body of the victim could be possible due to hanging. She denied that there is no sign of struggle on the body of the victim and thus, the categorical statement of the injuries found on the body of the victim, externally and internally have duly corroborated by the allegation of rape alleged by the victim upon her. 16. The allegation of rape and injuries have further been corroborated by the FSL report (Ex-P/29 and P/30) by which blood has been found on the piece of torned cloths of the victim and towel seized from the spot which was identified to be belonged with the accused Vinod Tirkey, further the semen and sperms were found on the vaginal slides of the victim and her underwear and also the semen slides of the appellant Vinod Tirkey and his underwear and thus, the chain to prove the allegation of rape has been completed from the FIR up to the FSL report. The defence could not be able to impute any difficiencies or discrepencies either in the investigation or in the allegation and evidence of the prosecution, so that the appellants could be extended to the benefit of doubt rather the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants by theses evidences. 17.PW/5, who is the witness of memorandum and seizure of the appellant Vinod Tirkey who duly supported the prosecution’s case and remain firm in his crossexamination also. 18.PW/8, who is the Deputy Collector, who was the then Tahsildar, who issued the Social Status Certificate of the victim (Ex-P/6). He proved 14 that the victim belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community and after due verification, he issued the certificate (Ex-P/6). Nothing is evidence to disbelief that the victim does not belong to that particular community and even it is not substancially disputed by the appellant that the victim does not belong to that particular community. 19.PW/11 and PW/13 are the investigating officers who conducted their part in the investigation and duly supported the prosecution’s case. 20.From all these evidences, the prosecution has duly proved the allegation against the appellants that they kidnapped the victim towards jungle, committed gang rape upon her and tried to commit her murder by hanging her in a tree. Fortunately, the cloths which is used as ligature were broken and she fell down in the pit and could have been servived. 21.The submissions of the appellants that the appellant No. 2 has not committed any sexual intercourse with the victim and he could not be convicted for the offence of gang rape, is not acceptable in favour of the provisions of Section 376-D of IPC. It is necessary here to notice the provisions of Section 376-D of IPC, which reads as under:- “Where a woman is raped by one or more persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and with fine: Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim: Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.” 15 22.from perusal of Section 376-D of IPC, it transpires that where the woman is raped by one or more person, constituting a group or acting a furtherance of common intension, each of those persons shall to deem to have committed the offence of rape. In the present case, it is the specific allegation against the appellant No. 2 that at the time of incident, the appellant No. 1 Vinod Tirkey came from back side, covered her face by cloth and at that time, the appellant Sarju Panika came from back side and both of them dragged her towards jungle. It is also the specific allegation that when the appellant Vinod Tirkey committing rape upon her, the appellant no. 2 Sarju Panika caught her hold and thereafter, both of them tried to attempted to commit her murder by hanging her in the tree. All theses acts of both the appellants clearly demonstrates that both of them have actively participated in furtherance of their common intension and both of them liable to be punished for the offence of gang rape. 23.So far as, the offence under Section 307 of IPC is concerned, as has been observed earlier that there is specific allegation against the appellants that both of them have attempted to commit murder of the victim by hanging her in the tree through a ligature made from her torn cloths. Also clearly demonstrate their common intension that after committing gang rape, they attempted to commit murder of the victim. The specific allegation against both the appellants could not be rebutted in the evidence of the witnesses and thus, both the accused persons have rightly been convicted for the offence of Section 307 of IPC for attempted to commit murder of the victim. The seized ligature which is the tourning cloths of the victim, the evidence of PW/3 that he saw the victim only in her undergarments, presence of blood in the torn 16 cloths of the victim, are sufficiently established the offence that the accused persons used the torn cloths of the victim as ligature and tried to hang her through the tree, in which we do not find any scope for interference in the conviction of the appellants under Section 307 of IPC also. 24.The next question would be the conviction of the appellant No. 2 for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. It is the evidence of the victim that she knew the appellants and the appellant Vinod Tirkey belongs to Other Backward Classes and she belongs to Kol community which comes under the Scheduled Tribe community. The social status report of the victim has been proved by Pw/8 who issued the social status certificate (Ex-P/6). The defence taken by the appellants that they worked with the father of the victim as labourer in his under construction house for which there was a due wages. When the appellants worked at the under construction house of the father of the victim, they must have knowledge that the victim belongs to that particular community and it is not the specific defence of the appellants that they did not know the social status of the victim or her father. 25.The offence of Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act stated that when any person commits any offence under the IPC punishable with imprisonment for a turm of 10 years or more against a person knowing that such person is a member of Scheduled Tribe, it shall be punishable with imprisonment for life with fine. In the present case, the offence of gang rape by the appellant upon the victim has been found proved which is punishable more than 10 years imprisonment and thus, the ingrediants of offence under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act is completely satisfies that the appellants knowingly committed the 17 offence upon the victim that she belongs to Schedule Tribe community and thus, the convictin of the appellant No. 2 Sarju Panika for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act is also does not suffers from any perversity or illegality. 26.It is also necessary to observe here the consideration of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Prahlad v. State of Haryana”, (2015) 8 SCC 688. In para 17, it has been considered that:- “17. It has to be borne in mind that an offence of rape is basically an assault on the human rights of a victim. It is an attack on her individuality. It creates an incurable dent in her right and free will and personal sovereignty over the physical frame. Everyone in any civilised society has to show respect for the other individual and no individual has any right to invade on physical frame of another in any manner. It is not only an offence but such an act creates a scar in the marrows of the mind of the victim. Anyone who indulges in a crime of such nature not only does he violate the penal provision of IPC but also the right of equality, right of individual identity and in the ultimate eventuality an important aspect of rule of law which is a constitutional commitment. The Constitution of India, an organic document, confers rights. It does not condescend or confer any allowance or grant. It recognises rights and the rights are strongly entrenched in the constitutional framework, its ethos and philosophy, subject to certain limitations. Dignity of every citizen flows from the fundamental precepts of the equality clause engrafted under Article 14 and right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, for they are the “fons juris” of our Constitution. The said rights are constitutionally secured. 18. Therefore, regard being had to the gravity of the offence, reduction of sentence indicating any imaginary special reason would be an anathema to the very concept of rule of law. The perpetrators of 18 the crime must realise that when they indulge in such an offence, they really create a concavity in the dignity and bodily integrity of an individual which is recognised, assured and affirmed by the very essence of Article 21 of the Constitution.” 27.In view of the aforesaid evidence and consideration, we are of the considered opinion that the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants for the alleged offences and there is no scope for any interference in their appeal. 28.Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellants fails and hereby dismissed. 29.The appellants are reported to be in jail since 13.10.2019, they shall serve the entire sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court. 30.Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellants are undergoing their jail sentence to serve the same on the appellants informing them that they are 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. 31.The trial court record 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