SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Chh) 295

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, SANJAY S. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Jamuna Bai, W/o Narendra Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1143, 1160, 1202 of 2014
Decided on : 13-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Surendra Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Mehta, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Ashish Tiwari

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 302, 460 and 34 - Criminal appeal against conviction - Appellants convicted for conspiracy and murder following evidence of motive through revenue documents and confessions leading to bloodstained weapon recovery - Convictions upheld for two appellants; others acquitted due to insufficient corroborative evidence. (Paras 1, 4, 36, 47)

(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 30 - Admissibility of confessional statements against co-accused - Confessions deemed weak evidence without sufficient corroboration from other witnesses or concrete circumstantial evidence. (Paras 37-45)

Facts of the case:
The case involved disputing parties related by marriage, leading to the murder of two individuals due to a property dispute, with incriminating evidence (confessions and bloodstains) established against two accused while others were acquitted due to lack of sufficient evidence linking them.

Findings of Court:
The trial court’s identification of motive, confessions, and evidence led to the conviction of two defendants, while the appeals of three others were allowed due to lack of corroborative evidence.

Issues: The main issues were proof of motive, validity of confessions, and whether sufficient evidence existed to uphold convictions against all appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that motive can be crucial in circumstantial evidence cases, yet emphasized the need for corroboration of confessional statements of co-defendants, which alone cannot sustain a conviction.

Result: Appeals of Jamuna Bai and Shyam Sunder dismissed; Appeals of Surendra Kumar, Sahaniram, and Dadhibal allowed and convictions set aside.

Table of Content
1. identification of appellants and preliminary details. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual background of the case. (Para 3 , 4)
3. details about evidence and investigation results. (Para 5 , 6)
4. arguments presented by the appellants' counsel. (Para 9 , 10)
5. prosecution's counterarguments. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
6. questions of whether deaths were homicides. (Para 14 , 15)
7. evaluation of motive in the crime. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
8. validity of confessions as evidence. (Para 21 , 22 , 24)
9. the principle surrounding the use of confessions under section 30 of the evidence act. (Para 39 , 41 , 44)
10. final judgments and their implications. (Para 46 , 47)

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. Two appellants namely, Jamuna Bai (A-1) & Shyam Sunder (A-2) in Cr.A.No.1202/2014; sole appellant namely, Surendra Kumar (A-3) in Cr.A.No.1160/2014; and two appellants namely, Sahaniram (A-4) & Dadhibal (A-5) in Cr.A.No.1143/2014, have preferred these appeals under Section 3 74(2) of the CrPC feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment dated 7-11-2014 passed by the 1 st Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa in Sessions Trial No.80/2013, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellants in the following manner: -

Conviction

Sentence

Section 120B of the IPC

Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- each, in default, additional RI for two years

Section 460 of the IPC

RI for ten years and fine of Rs. 20,000/- each, in default, additional RI for two years

Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC (two counts)

Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- each, in default, additional RI for two years

2. Since all the three criminal appeals have arisen out of one and same judgment dated 7-11-2014 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, in one Sessions Trial No.80/2013 and since common question of fact and law is involved in all the three appeals, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. It is admitted fact on record that Sushil Chand Jaiswal had two daughters namely, Jamuna Bai – the accused/appellant (A-1) and Namrata Jaiswal – deceased. Jamuna Bai was married to Narendra Kumar (PW-7) and Namrata was married to Shyam Kumar – another deceased. The family of Jamuna Bai was staying in the house owned by Sushil Chand Jaiswal at Sakti in ground floor and Namrata Jaiswal along with her husband Shyam Kumar on the fateful day was residing in second floor along with her family. It is the case of the prosecution that Jamuna Bai wanted to grab the entire property in which her sister Namrata Jaiswal along with her husband were staying. Revenue proceedings Exs.P-30 to P-44 were initiated by Namrata Jaiswal against Narendra Kumar (PW-7) – husband of Jamuna Bai before the revenue court (Tahsildar, Kharsia and Tahsildar, Sakti) for partition, etc.. It is the further case of the prosecution that Jamuna Bai (A-1) also lodged complaint before Police Station Kharsia against the deceased persons vide Ex.P-20 and in light of that complaint, statements were recorded vide Exs.P-21 to P-24. Further case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 10-4-2013, in the morning, one Onkar Prasad Jaiswal (neither cited nor examined) informed Shivkumar (PW6) – brother of deceased Shyam Kumar about the incident, thereafter, Shivkumar (PW-6) came to Sakti in the house of Namrata Jaiswal & Shyam Kumar and noticed that throat of both Namrata & Shyam Kumar was cut and they were lying dead on bed and blood spread all over the floor. Thereafter, Shivkumar (PW-6) lodged first information report Ex.P-15 at Police Station Sakti on 10-4-2013 against unknown person and on the same day, morgue intimations were got registered by Shivkumar (PW-6). Morgue intimation Ex.P-16 was regist



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top