Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, CJ., RAJANI DUBEY, J.
Laxmi Narayan Dhruv son of Gurbal Singh Dhruv – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1334 of 2019
Decided on : 10-04-2024
Section 302 IPC - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Burden of proof on the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act - Upheld conviction and sentence
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the appellant for the murder of three individuals, based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution presented evidence of the deaths being homicidal in nature, and the appellant's failure to provide a plausible explanation for the circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act lay with the accused to provide a convincing explanation for the deaths that occurred in the house where the appellant was present. The court upheld the conviction and sentence based on the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the burden of proof on the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the reliability of the child eyewitness testimony, and the sufficiency of the evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the burden on the accused to provide a convincing explanation for the deaths that occurred in the house where the appellant was present, as per Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The court also highlighted the reliability of the child eyewitness testimony and the sufficiency of the evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the finding that the prosecution had proven its case beyond all reasonable doubts, upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to serve the sentence.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.07.2019 passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, District Korba, in Sessions Trial No.63/2018, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the IPC (three times) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life (three times) and fine of Rs.500/- (three times), in default of payment of each fine, to further undergo RI for one month.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.05.2018 at about 6.30 A.M. informant Raj Kumar Yadav had lodged merg intimation (Exs.P-1 and P-2) to the effect that his nephew Kishan Yadav told him that the appellant committed murder of Tikautin Bai, Raj Kumari and also assaulted Chaitin Bai by wheel pana. Subsequently, during treatment injured Chaitin Bai also died. On the basis of merg intimation, FIR in Crime No.131/18 for offence under Section 302 and 307 of the IPC was registered against the appellant vide Ex.P-3. Spot map was prepared by the investigating officer vide Ex.P-4. Inquests over the bodies of the deceased Ramkumari Yadav and Tikaitin Bai were prepared vide Exs.P-7 and P-8. Bloodstained soil, plain soil and shawl were seized from the body of deceased Rajkumari Yadav vide Ex.P-9. Bloodstained soil, plain soil and shawl were also seized from the body of deceased Tikaitin Bai vide Ex.P-10. Bloodstained soil and plain soil were also seized from the spot where injured Chaiti Bai lying vide Ex.P-11. Patwari also prepared spot map vide Ex.P-13. Inquest was over the body of deceased Chaitibai was prepared vide Ex.P-15. Memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded vide Ex.P-16 and on the basis of his memorandum statement, wheel pana was seized from his possession vide Ex.P-17. Clothes of the appellant were seized vide Ex.P-18. The appellant was arrested on 24.05.2018 vide arrest memo Ex.P- 19. Injured Chaiti Bai was sent to the Community Health Center, Pali where Dr.Sourabh Gupta examined her vide Ex.P-22 and found following injuries:-
ii. Along with bone fracture on left parito occipital region (mid) of.
Iii. Left side multiple ribs fracture on anterior aspect.
iv. Right side multiple ribs facture on anterior aspect. (as per examination report)
The doctor has opined that all injuries are caused by hard & blunt object and are gravious in nature. After death, postmortem over the body of deceased Chaiti Bai was conducted by Dr.Sourabh Gupta (PW-13) vide Ex.P-23 and found following injuries:-
2. Bone fracture on left parito occipital region (mid of).
3. Left 3rd, 4th, 5th ribs fracture at midclavicular line.
4. Right 5th, 6th, 7th ribs fracture also at midclavicular line.(as per PM report)
The doctor opined that death occurred due to coma as a result of head injury. Death was homicidal in nature. Dead body of deceased Ramkumari was sent for postmortem to the Community Health Center, Pali where Dr.Sourabh Gupta (PW-13) conducted postmortem over the body of deceased Ramkumari vide Ex.P-30 and found following injuries:-
2. Fracture Parietal & temporal bone with lacerated wound 10x4x4 cm.
3. Fracture left 4th, 5th vertebra.
4. Brain come out (grey and while matter).
5. 2-3 months foetus preserved.
(as per PM report)
The doctor opined that death occurred due to hemorrhagic shock as a result of head injury and death was homicidal in nature. Dead body of deceased Tikaitin Bai was sent for postmortem to the Community Health Center, Pali where Dr.Sourabh Gupta (PW-13) conducted postmortem over the body of deceased Tikaitin Bai vide Ex.P-31 and found following injuries:-
The competency and reliability of child witnesses, as well as the careful evaluation of their testimony, are crucial in cases where their evidence forms a significant part of the prosecution's case.
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act shifts to the accused if the prosecution establishes the facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence ....
(1) Child witness – Evidence of a child witness for all purposes is deemed to be on same footing as any other witness as long child is found to be competent to testify.(2) Murder of wife and disappea....
The judgment establishes the principle that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The application of Section 106 of t....
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act places a duty on the accused to offer a plausible explanation for the circumstances of the crime, especially in cases of circumstantial evide....
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution in cases of dowry death, and circumstantial evidence must be conclusive to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The reliability and trustworthiness of a child witness's testimony, as well as the sufficiency of evidence, are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
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
