Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date:

2024.09.26

10:37:34 +0530

2024:CGHC:37792 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 496 of 2003 Reserved on 18.09.2024 Delivered on 25.09.2024 Rajesh Marabi S/o Deo Sai Marabi, aged about 40 years, agriculturist by occupation, R/o village – Lodhi, Police Station –

Basantpur, District – Surguja (CG)

... Appellant versus The state Of Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Shri Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate For Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Pandey, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswa l

C A V Judgment

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2)

of Cr.P.C. calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.04.2003, passed by learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.189/2002, whereby the appellant herein has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo one year additional rigorous imprisonment.

2. The case of prosecution, in short, is that on 21.11.2001 at about 12 to 1 p.m., in village Ramnagar, Police Station Basantpur, District – Surguja, deceased Rajendrababu along with Kunjal Panika (PW-2) came to the grocery shop of Basant Kumar (PW-8). Rajendrababu was under intoxication and he lay down on a cot kept in the shop. He was abusing without taking anyone’s name while lying on the cot. At that time, the appellant along with acquitted accused Moti Singh came there and asked for cigarettes from Basant’s son Ganesh. The appellant asked Basant about deceased Rajendrababu to which Basant told that he was the newly posted Patwari of this circle. It is alleged that the appellant and acquitted accused Moti lifted Rajendrababu from the cot and threw him down and after that Rajendrababu stopped muttering. The appellant lifted Rajendrababu by shaking his neck, upon which Basant and other villagers stopped him, then the appellant threw deceased Rajendrababu on the bed and left from there. After sometime, Rajendrababu woke up staggering and said that he was not feeling well and after taking permission from Basant, he went inside the shop and slept on a cot kept there. At around 6:00 p.m. village Chowkidar Subraj came to Basant’s shop in search of deceased Rajendrababu. When he saw that Rajendrababu was not responding or breathing, he informed village Sarpanch who immediately came there and after checking his pulse told that Patwari Rajendrababu was dead. Information about unnatural death of Patwari Rajendrababu was given to Tahsildar, Wadraf Nagar who reported the matter to Police Station Basantpur, pursuant to which, Merg Intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-19 and FIR was registered vide Ex.P-17. Inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P-3 and the dead body was sent for postmortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Manju Ekka (PW- 15) vide Ex.P-15 in which the cause of death was opined to be asphyxia due to strangulation and nature of death was homicidal. After completion of investigation, the accused persons were charge-sheeted for the offence under Section

302 or 302/34 of IPC.

3. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 23 documents. The statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them in the evidence brought on record by the prosecution, pleaded innocence and false implication. However, the accused persons in support of their defence have neither examined any witness nor exhibited any document.

4. After conclusion of trial, learned trial Court, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, found that offence under Section 302 of IPC is not made out against the appellant but o