1 2026:CGHC:18644-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 654 of 2024 Ramadhar Miri S/o Late Guruvar Miri, Aged About 47 Years R/o Gram Aanchimaar, Police Station Rampur, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Rampur District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy G.A. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 23/04/2026 1. The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.02.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Korba (C.G.) in Sessions Case No. 20 of 2023, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.04.29 11:25:52 +0530 2 imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.09.2022, at about 23:30 hours, the daughter of the deceased, Neha Kanwar (PW-01), lodged a merg intimation (Exhibit P-01) stating that on the same day at about 07:30 PM, the nephew of her neighbor Dharam Singh, namely Gaurav (PW-03), came to her house and informed that her father, Babulal Kanwar, was lying on the road near his house with bleeding injuries on his head. Thereafter, she along with her mother Ganga Bai (PW-02) went to the spot near the house of Dharam Singh and found the deceased lying in a pool of blood with serious head injuries. It was further reported that the appellant Ramadhar Miri had a prior dispute with the deceased and had threatened him earlier in the evening at about 05:00 PM over an issue relating to an electric wire. On the basis of the said information, FIR (Exhibit P-19) was registered against the appellant. The inquest (Exhibit P-06) over the dead body was conducted and the body was sent for postmortem to District Hospital, Korba. Dr. Bhojkumar Sahu (PW-05) conducted the postmortem and submitted his report (Exhibit P-10), wherein he found grievous incised injuries on the left side of the head and opined that the death was homicidal in nature caused due to head injury resulting in fracture of skull and damage to brain. The spot map (Exhibit P-03) was prepared and a related document was obtained from the Patwari (Exhibit P-26). Blood-stained and plain soil were seized from the spot vide seizure memo (Exhibit P-08). The appellant was arrested on 15.09.2022 and 3 his memorandum statement (Exhibit P-13) was recorded, pursuant to which a Tangiya (axe) was seized from his house vide seizure memo (Exhibit P-14). The said weapon was sent to the doctor for query, and the doctor submitted his report (Exhibit P-11) opining that the injuries found on the body of the deceased could have been caused by the said weapon. The clothes of the deceased were seized vide seizure memo (Exhibit P-21). The seized articles, including the full shirt of the deceased (Exhibit A), the Tangiya (Exhibit B), and the blood-stained and plain soil (Exhibits C1 and D2), were sent for chemical examination to the Regional FSL, Bilaspur, from where report (Exhibit P-C1) was received. As per the FSL report, human blood was detected on the shirt of the deceased and the seized weapon, and the blood found on the weapon was of “O” group, while the soil samples were also found stained with blood. 3. Statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded and, after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Korba. The case was thereafter committed to the Court of Sessions and was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Korba. 4. 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 to be tried. 5. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded, in which he denied 4 the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, pleaded innocence and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He did not adduce any defence evidence. During the course of trial, the defence suggested that due to darkness at the place of occurrence, identification of the assailant was not possible and that the appellant was present at his house at the relevant time. 6. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment. Hence this appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, rendering their testimonies unreliable. It is contended that the alleged eyewitness Gaurav (PW-03) is not a trustworthy witness, as his statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and his deposition before the Court contain significant inconsistencies. It is further submitted that the incident is stated to have occurred during evening hours when there was insufficient light at the place of occurrence, thereby making proper identification doubtful. It is also argued that the statement of the said witness was not recorded promptly, which creates further doubt regarding its credibility. ******* It is further contended that the chain of circumstances is not complete and does not form a consistent link pointing towards the guilt 5 of the appellant. The memorandum and seizure witnesses, namely Kashiram (PW-06) and Dharam Singh (PW-04), have not fully supported the prosecution case and have admitted in their cross- examination that they had signed documents at the instance of the police without knowing their contents. It is also submitted that there are discrepancies in respect of the seized weapon (Tangiya), particularly with regard to its measurement as noted by the investigating officer and the doctor, which casts doubt on the alleged recovery. ******* It is further argued that no clear and consistent motive has been established by the prosecution, as there are contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses regarding the alleged dispute. In the absence of cogent, reliable and clinching evidence, it is submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated and is entitled to be acquitted of the charge. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that there is sufficient evidence on record to establish that the appellant committed the murder of Babulal Kanwar. It is contended that the eyewitness Gaurav (PW-03) has supported the prosecution case and has deposed that he saw the appellant assaulting the deceased with a Tangiya (axe). His testimony, it is submitted, inspires confidence on material aspects of the incident. ******* It is further submitted that as per the FSL report, human blood was found on the seized weapon as well as on the clothes of the deceased, and the weapon was found to be stained with blood of “O” 6 group, which lends support to the prosecution case. The medical evidence along with the query report of the doctor further corroborates that the injuries sustained by the deceased could have been caused by the seized weapon. ******* It is thus argued that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment warranting interference by this Court. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein above and also gone through the records of the trial court with utmost circumspection. 10. So far as the homicidal death of the deceased Babulal Kanwar is concerned, the learned trial Court has relied upon the evidence of PW- 05, Dr. Bhojkumar Sahu, who conducted the postmortem examination. The said witness has deposed that on 15.09.2022, he conducted the postmortem of the dead body of the deceased and found grievous incised injuries on the left side of the head, resulting in fracture of the skull and damage to the brain. He opined that the death was homicidal in nature and was caused due to ante-mortem head injury. The postmortem report has been exhibited as Exhibit P-10. The witness has also proved the query report relating to the seized weapon (Exhibit P-11). In cross-examination, nothing material has been elicited to discredit his testimony regarding the nature and cause of death. 7 11. The medical evidence in the form of postmortem report (Exhibit P-10) stands duly corroborated by the merg intimation (Exhibit P-01) and the inquest report (Exhibit P-06), wherein injuries on the head of the deceased have also been noted. Thus, the finding recorded by the learned trial Court that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature is based on proper appreciation of evidence and does not suffer from any perversity or illegality. 12. So far as the involvement of the appellant in the offence in question is concerned, the case of the prosecution rests primarily on the testimony of eyewitness Gaurav (PW-03) along with other corroborative circumstances. According to the prosecution, on the date of the incident at about 07:30 PM, the deceased Babulal Kanwar was found lying injured near the house of Dharam Singh. It has also come in evidence that earlier in the evening there was a dispute between the appellant and the deceased relating to an electric connection. 13. The eyewitness Gaurav (PW-03) has stated that while he was going out of his house, he saw the appellant present at the spot holding a Tangiya (axe) near the deceased. He has further stated that he immediately returned and informed his family members about the incident. Though the defence has questioned his credibility on account of certain inconsistencies and the issue of visibility at the place of occurrence, the witness has consistently stated that he had seen the appellant at or near the place of occurrence at the relevant time. 14. PW-04 Dharam Singh has deposed that upon being informed by Gaurav, he came out of his house and found the deceased lying on the 8 road in an injured condition with bleeding head injuries. Similar is the version of PW-01 Neha Kanwar and PW-02 Ganga Bai, who reached the spot after receiving information and found the deceased lying injured. These witnesses, though not eyewitnesses to the occurrence, have supported the prosecution case regarding the immediate circumstances in which the deceased was found. 15. The evidence on record further indicates that there was a dispute between the appellant and the deceased shortly before the incident. The weapon alleged to have been used in the offence was recovered pursuant to the memorandum of the appellant, and as per the FSL report, human blood was found on the said weapon. The medical evidence also establishes that the injuries sustained by the deceased were caused by a hard and sharp object, which could be caused by such a weapon. 16. Thus, on the basis of the evidence of the eyewitness coupled with the surrounding circumstances, the prosecution has sought to establish the involvement of the appellant in the commission of the offence. 17. It is well settled that the testimony of a child witness, if found to be credible and trustworthy, can form the basis of conviction without the necessity of corroboration. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held that a child witness is not an incompetent witness merely by reason of age; what is required is that the Court must be satisfied about the witness’s capacity to understand and give rational answers, and that the evidence is free from tutoring or embellishment. In Panchhi v. State of U.P., (1998) 7 SCC 177, it was observed that 9 the evidence of a child witness must be evaluated more carefully, but if found reliable, there is no legal impediment in acting upon the same. This principle has been reiterated in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramesh, (2011) 4 SCC 786, wherein it has been held that conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a child witness if it inspires confidence and is corroborated by surrounding circumstances. 18. Further, it is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that conviction can be based on the testimony of a solitary witness, provided the same is wholly reliable. Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act makes it clear that no particular number of witnesses is required to prove a fact. In Vadivelu Thevar v. State of Madras, AIR 1957 SC 614, the Hon’ble Supreme Court classified witnesses into three categories wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable and held that conviction can safely be based on the testimony of a single witness if he/she falls in the category of wholly reliable. This position has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent decisions including Namdeo v. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 14 SCC 150, wherein it has been held that the testimony of a solitary eyewitness, if trustworthy and of sterling quality, is sufficient to sustain conviction. 19. In the present case, the child witness Gaurav (PW-03) has consistently deposed regarding the presence and involvement of the appellant at the place of occurrence, and nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination to discredit his version or to indicate that he was tutored. His testimony appears natural, cogent, and consistent with the 10 sequence of events, and is further corroborated by the medical evidence and recovery of the weapon. Therefore, his evidence inspires confidence and qualifies as reliable testimony capable of forming the basis of conviction. 20. In the matter of “State of Karnataka v. Shantappa Madivalappa Galapuji and Ors.” 2009(12) SCC 731, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Para 15 has held as under:- “15. “6….. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short "the Evidence Act") does not prescribe any particular age as a determinative factor to treat a witness to be a competent one. On the contrary, Section 118 of the Evidence Act envisages that all persons shall be competent to testify, unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them or from giving rational answers to these questions, because of tender years, extreme old age, disease -- whether of mind, or any other cause of the same kind. A child of tender age can be allowed to testify if he has intellectual capacity to understand questions and give rational answers thereto. This position was concisely stated by Brewer, J. in Wheeler v. United States (159 US 523). The evidence of a child witness is not required to be rejected per se, but the court as a rule of prudence considers such evidence with close scrutiny and only on being convinced about the quality thereof and reliability can record conviction, based thereon. [See Suryanarayana v. State of Karnataka (2001 (9) SCC 129)] 11 7. In Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra [(1997) 5 SCC 341] it was held as follows: (SCC p. 343, para 5): ******* "5. ….. A child witness if found competent to depose to the facts and reliable one such evidence could be the basis of conviction. In other words even in the absence of oath the evidence of a child witness can be considered under Section 118 of the Evidence Act provided that such witness is able to understand the questions and able to give rational answers thereof. The evidence of a child witness and credibility thereof would depend upon the circumstances of each case. The only precaution which the court should bear in mind while assessing the evidence of a child witness is that the witness must be a reliable one and his/her demeanour must be like any other competent witness and there is no likelihood of being tutored." ******* The decision on the question whether the child witness has sufficient intelligence primarily rests with the trial Judge who notices his manners, his apparent possession or lack of intelligence, and the said Judge may resort to any examination which will tend to disclose his capacity and intelligence as well as his understanding of the obligation of an oath. The decision of the trial court may, however, be disturbed by the higher court if from what is preserved in the records, it is clear that his conclusion was erroneous. This precaution is necessary because child witnesses are amenable to tutoring and often live in a world of make-believe. Though it is an established principle that child witnesses are dangerous witnesses as 12 they are pliable and liable to be influenced easily, shaken and moulded, but it is also an accepted norm that if after careful scrutiny of their evidence the court comes to the conclusion that there is an impress of truth in it, there is no obstacle in the way of accepting the evidence of a child witness. ******* The above position was highlighted in Ratansingh Dalsukhbhai Nayak v. State of Gujarat (2004(1) SCC 64).” 21. In the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Krishna Master and others, (2010) 12 SCC 324 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Para 47 and 48 as under: “47. It is well known principal of law that reliance can be placed on the solitary statement of a witness if the court comes to the conclusion that the said statement is the true and correct version of the case of the prosecution. The courts are concerned with the merit and the statement of a particular witness and not at all concerned with the number of witnesses examined by the prosecution. The time-honoured rule of appreciating evidence is that it has to be weighed and not counted. The law of evidence does not require any particular number of witnesses to be examined in proof of a given fact. However, where, the court finds that the testimony of solitary witness is neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable, it may, in given set of facts, seek corroboration but to disbelieve reliable testimony of a solitary witness on the ground that others have not been examined is to do complete injustice to the prosecution. 13 48. This Court, on re-appreciation of evidence, finds that the testimony of witness Madan Lal is cogent, consistent and reliable. Taking into consideration the manner in which witness Madan Lal had testified before the Court and the fact that nothing could be elicited in his lengthy cross- examination for days together to impeach his credibility, this Court is of the view that his testimony is reliable and can be accepted without any reservations. Therefore, non-examination of his brother or sister or few others who had gathered near the house of deceased Guljari Lal after the incident is of no significance and does not affect credibility of testimony of the said witness.” 22. Moreover, the prosecution has also established motive through the testimony of PW-02 Ganga Bai, the wife of the deceased, who has clearly deposed about the prior dispute between the appellant and the deceased regarding the electric wire shortly before the incident. Though motive is not a sine qua non for conviction when there is direct evidence, its presence lends additional assurance to the prosecution case. The existence of prior enmity and immediate provocation provides a plausible reason for the appellant to commit the offence and strengthens the chain of circumstances. 23. Thus, in view of the settled legal position and the quality of evidence on record, particularly the reliable testimony of the child eyewitness (PW-03), duly supported by the evidence of motive and other corroborative circumstances, the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 14 24. From the evidence on record, it stands established that the appellant was present at the place of occurrence and was seen assaulting/intercepting the deceased on the date of incident, and immediately thereafter, the deceased was found lying on the road in a critically injured condition. The seized weapon, namely the Tangiya (axe) recovered from the house of the appellant, was found to be stained with human blood in the FSL report (Exhibit P-C1), and more specifically with blood of “O” group. These circumstances, when read cumulatively, clearly support the prosecution case and point towards the involvement of the appellant in the commission of the offence. The testimony of the child eyewitness Gaurav (PW-03), along with the medical evidence and the query report, corroborates that the deceased sustained fatal injuries on his head and neck by a sharp-edged weapon, resulting in his homicidal death. In view of the entire evidence on record, we find no reason to take a view different from that of the learned trial Court, and accordingly, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant are hereby affirmed. 25. The appeal filed by the appellant is devoid of merits, liable to be and is hereby dismissed. The appellant shall undergo the entire sentence 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 15 assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 27. Let a copy of this judgment and the original records be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved