Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, Sanjay S. Agrawal, JJ.
Lav Kumar son of late Bolo Ram Oraon (In Jail) - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through S.H.O. Kusmi - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1255 of 2014
Decided On : 07-07-2022
Motive - Murder - IPC 302, IPC 201 - The court discussed the motive of the offence, the circumstances of the crime, and the reliability of witness testimony. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove any motive for the offence and that the witness testimony was not reliable. The conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his mother and causing the disappearance of her body. The prosecution alleged that the appellant murdered his mother and threw her body into a well to claim the property bequeathed to him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove any motive for the offence and that the witness testimony was not reliable. The conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges.
Issues: The issues revolved around the motive of the offence, the reliability of witness testimony, and the circumstances of the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution failed to prove any motive for the offence and that the witness testimony was not reliable, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was allowed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC were set aside. The appellant was acquitted of the charges.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant herein under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the judgment dated 01.12.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, in Sessions Trial No.264/2013, by which the appellant has been convicted for offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.500/, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month under Section 302 of the IPC and R.I. for three years and fine of Rs.500/, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month under Section 201 of the IPC.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.3.2013 at 9 p.m. at village Harri (Uraontoli), Police Station Kusmi, the appellant murdered his mother Chechara Bai, aged about 72 years and caused disappearance of body of his mother by throwing dead body into well and thereby committed the offence. It is admitted fact on record that the deceased was mother of the appellant herein and one Sanman (PW-1), Mishribai (PW-2) is wife of Sanman (PW-1) and Laxman @ Ladu (PW3) and Krishna Ram (PW4) are two sos of Sanman (PW-1) and Mishribai (PW-2). It is also admitted position on record that during lifetime of their father i.e. Chechra Bai's husband, their property was divided in three parts namely 1/3rd share in favour of the appellant herein, 1/3rd share in favour of Sanman (PW-1) and 1/3rd share in favour of Chechra Bai and her husband. After death of Chechra Bai's husband, two acres of land fell in possession of Chechra Bai was bequeathed by her in favour of Krishna Ram (PW4), son of Sanman (PW-1) (nephew of the deceased) by Will on 25.11.2010 vide Ex.P24 and thereafter by Will dated 11.10.2012 (Ex.P25) Will executed in favour of Krishna Ram (PW4) on 25.11.2010 was revoked and another Will was executed in favour of the appellant bequeathing the entire two acres of land in favour of the accused / appellant herein, which was disputed by Sanman (PW-1), Mishribai (PW-2), Laxman @ Ladu (PW3) and Krishna Ram (PW4). Thereafter on 15.3.2013 (Ex.P26) Chechra Bai executed another Will in favour of Sanman (PW-1) and the appellant herein by giving 1/21/ 2 share to both sons and on 23.3.2013 immediately after 7 days Chechra Bai is said to have murdered and her dead body was found inside the well. On 24.3.2013 merg was registered at the instance of the appellant herein being Merg No.4/2013 (Ex.P30) that in the night of 23.3.2013 his mother had gone to the house of Laxman (PW3) to make him understand as he was quarreling someone, but she did not come back in the night and she has died by drowning into well, pursuant to which, merg inquiry was conducted by Kailash Singh (PW-24) and he found that Chechra Bai has been assassinated. Pursuant to which, FIR (Ex.P36) was registered. Spot map was prepared by investigating officer vide Ex.P1. Dead body of the deceased was recovered from well and it was sent for postmortem to Community Health Center, Kusmi, where Dr.T. Sai (PW-20) conducted postmortem vide Ex.P23 and opined that cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation and death was homicidal in nature. Statements of Pushnath (PW5), Moti Ram (PW9) and Smt.Sumitrai Bai (PW-14) were recorded and thereafter on 10.4.2013 the appellant herein was arrested, pursuant to his memorandum statement (Ex.P7), wooden stick which is used by the deceased for her support was seized vide Ex.P8. Other articles were also seized in accordance with law. After due investigation, the appellant was chargesheeted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanujganj, who was committed the case to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, Surguja for trial. The accused/appellant abjured the guilt and entered into defence.
3. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 24 witnesses and exhibited 36 documents Exs.P1 to P36. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Se
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove motive and the reliability of witness testimony in criminal cases.
Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, states as burden of proving fact especially within knowledge - When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the testimony of a sole eyewitness to be wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence, failing which the accused may be e....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for reliable and corroborated evidence to establish guilt, especially when relying on the testimony of a sole eyewitness.
Eyewitness testimony holds credibility even when minor contradictions exist; motive for crime established through related witness accounts legitimizes conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The court established that the conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder is justified when intent to kill is not proven, relying on witness credibility and evidential discrepancies.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, the shift of burden of proof to the appellant, and the admissibility of extra-judicial confessions in esta....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
