Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, ARVIND KUMAR VERMA, JJ.
Nitish Kumar Banjare, S/o Omprakash Banjare – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1524 of 2023
Decided on : 24-01-2024
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Sections 302 and 460 of the IPC - 27 - 114 - The court affirmed the finding that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature due to head injury and rupture of vital organs. The recovery of incriminating articles from the appellant pursuant to his memorandum statement satisfied the requirement of Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The court held that the appellant's possession of the stolen money soon after the murder invoked the presumption under Illustration (a) to Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution proved the motive of the appellant to commit the offence and connected him with the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, a watchman, was found murdered in a cooperative society building. The appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 460 of the IPC. The appellant abjured the guilt and entered into defense stating that he has been falsely implicated.
Finding of the Court:
The court affirmed the finding that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature due to head injury and rupture of vital organs. The recovery of incriminating articles from the appellant pursuant to his memorandum statement satisfied the requirement of Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The court held that the appellant's possession of the stolen money soon after the murder invoked the presumption under Illustration (a) to Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution proved the motive of the appellant to commit the offence and connected him with the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The main issue was whether the trial Court was justified in holding that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature and whether the appellant's possession of the stolen money soon after the murder invoked the presumption under Illustration (a) to Section 114 of the Evidence Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the recovery of incriminating articles from the appellant pursuant to his memorandum statement satisfied the requirement of Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The appellant's possession of the stolen money soon after the murder invoked the presumption under Illustration (a) to Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution proved the motive of the appellant to commit the offence and connected him with the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to serve out the sentence as ordered by the trial Court.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
Heard Mr. Neeraj Mehta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Dr. Surendra Kumar Dewangan, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State.
2. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.07.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) in Session Case No. 180 of 2021 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 460 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month (both sentences are directed to run concurrently).
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.06.2021 at about 8.30 p.m. in the night, after having a food deceased, namely, Harishankar Verma went his duty of watchman to Seva Sahakari Samiti Bhawan, Nandauri. On 17.06.2021, Harishankar Verma did not return to his home, then Smt. Tarini Verma (PW-8) daughter-in-law of Harishankar called mobile of Harishankar Verma, but phone was switched off. Then Smt. Tarini Verma (PW-8) came to the gate of Seva Sahakari Samiti Bhawan and Om Prakash Banjare (PW-12), Ravi Shankar Banjare and computer operator Dharmendra Kumar (PW-11) of the Society, the gate was closed, Smt. Tarini Verma removed the wire cordon and entered inside the building premises, as the first gate of the building was closed from inside and went near the channel gate and saw that the channel gate was opened about 1½ ft. After entering through the said channel gate, Smt. Tarini Verma called out to her father-in-law, but finding no voice, she entered the room and saw that the almirah was broken. On moving forward, she saw that deceased-Harishankar Verma was lying unconscious on the iron bed. Both his legs were dangling below the bed, there was a mark of injury on his head. Smt. Tarini Verma came back and called out Om Prakash Banjare, Ravi Shankar Banjare and Dharmendra standing outside the gate. The said three persons came inside and saw that the door of the almirah of the room was open and broken and Harishankar Verma was lying dead on the bed. The said persons had informed Shashikant Verma (PW-2) by phone. Shashikant Verma (PW-2) informed the police in this regard. According to Inspector Vinay Singh Baghel (PW-13), he had registered the Dehati Nalisi (Ex.P/4) on the basis of Dehati Merg Intimation (Ex.P/3). As per the instructions of Shashikant Verma (PW-2), a Spot Panchnama (Ex.P/6) was prepared. Notice was given to the witnesses under Section 175 of the Cr.P.C. (Ex.P/8) for panchnama proceedings of the dead body, in the presence of the witnesses, the Inquest Report (Ex.P/9) of the dead body of deceased-Harishankar was done. In Police Station Purani Bhilai First Information Report (FIR) (Ex.P/33) was registered on the basis of Dehati Merg Intimation (Ex.P/3). During the investigation, Inspector Vinay Singh Baghel (PW-13) on 18.06.2021, after taking the accused in custody and interrogating him, memorandum statement (Ex.P/13) of the appellant was registered. When the accused produced it, the key of the Scooty was seized as per Property Seizure Memo (Ex.P/14). When the accused produced it from the trunk of the Scooty, Rs. 8,00,510/- and the Scooty No. CG 07/AS – 7034 were seized as per Property Seizure Memo (Ex.P/15). The accused took out and presented the broken iron lock was seized as per Property Seizure Memo (Ex.P/16). The accused also produced a black colored full pant, which had stains and spots like blood and an unnumbered H.F. Deluxe motor cycle were seized as per Property Seizure Memo (Ex.P/17). Thereafter, the accused took out and presented a crowbar which had blood stains on the fr
The possession of stolen goods soon after the theft can be presumptive evidence of the charge of murder as well as robbery, invoking the presumption under Illustration (a) to Section 114 of the Evide....
Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act which enables Court to presume existence of certain facts provides that “Court may presume existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard bei....
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, excluding any possibility of innocence, to sustain a conviction for murder and robbery.
Possession of stolen property establishes presumption of guilt in murder and robbery cases, despite delays in recovery; the link between offenses must be clear and established.
Convictions based on circumstantial evidence must establish a reliable chain linking the accused to the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
In cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that are consistent with the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with their innocence.
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
