IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as well as the admissibility of confessional statements and the identification of the deceased's body.

JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

1. The present appeal is against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22-6-2021 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, in S.T. No.57/2018 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 302/34, 201 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’) and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment; RI for 7 years; and RI for 5 years, respectively with usual default stipulations. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. (i) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a missing report of Khubchand Sahu (since deceased) was lodged at Police Station Siltara by the accused No.2 namely; Neera Sahu, wife of the deceased, on 5- 10-2017, stating that on 27-9-2017 her husband went out from the house at 10.00 pm and the description was given. She also stated that the deceased always used to remain in inebriated condition due to heavy drinking habit and when enquired about the deceased from the relatives his whereabouts were not found, therefore, a missing report was lodged. On the basis of the same, the police started investigation.

(ii) During investigation it was found that wife of the deceased namely; Neera Sahu had illicit relation with the accused No.1 namely; Bhojram Sahu of the same village and doubts were cast on Bhojram and Neera. It was further revealed that since Neera Sahu had illicit relation, it was objected by the husband deceased. In the intervening night of 27th & 28th September, 2017, the accused No.1 Bhojram along with one Ravi Soni reached the house of the deceased and while he was sleeping Neera Sahu caught hold of his leg; Ravi Soni tightly caught hold of his waist; while Bhojram was assaulting the deceased by a hammer on the head of the deceased several times by such severe assault, he died on the spot. In order to conceal the crime, the dead body of the deceased, bloodstained clothes and the wooden plank were taken on the motorcycle, which was in the house of the deceased. The dead body was taken near a well; it was kept in a bag, which was tied with heavy stones and was thrown into the well. On enquiry the dead body was recovered and merg was registered vide Ex.P/47.

(iii) Against accused Neera Sahu & Bhojram, dehati nalishi bearing No.0/2017 for offence under Sections 302 & 201/34 of the IPC was registered vide Ex.P/48. Thereafter, FIR (Ex.P/57) was eventually registered. At the instance of Bhojram, the dead body was taken out from the well and panchnama (Ex.P/14) was prepared. Along with panchnama, site map was also prepared and the dead body was found which was tied with the heavy stones in a plastic bag by Niwad ¼fuokj½ . The stones were weighed 20 & 25 kgs. and other stones of 10, 15, 20 kgs., respectively. Further on the basis of memorandum the incriminating articles were recovered and also the scratches were taken out from the almirah frame and wall of the room wherein the incident happened. Saree with bloodstains and mobile SIM No…..3504 were recovered from Neera. Further at her instance, a bloodstained mattress ¼xn~nk½ and hammer were recovered. Likewise from Bhojram mobile No…..4032, a gents wallet with a photograph of his paramour Neera were recovered. Thereafter, from the house of Bhojram, a red coloured half T-shirt with bloodstains was also recovered. The motorcycle, which was used to carry the dead body, was also recovered and seized. The details of conversation made between mobile No…..3504 and 4032 were obtained. From the accused Ravi Soni, juvenile conflict with law, jeans pant, full shirt and cash of Rs. 500/- were recovered. Query report was also obtained in this regard that whether the death can be caused by use of such hammer ? It was in positive. FSL report was also obtained. Thereafter, the charge sheet was filed for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 34, 120-B of the IPC.

3. During trial the appellants/accused abjured their guilt and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses an