2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8968
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PRAHLAD YADAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRA/1081/2024
2025:CGHC:27196-DB MANPREET NAFR KAUR Digitally signed HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.06.25
10:48:09 +0530 CRA No. 1081 of 2024 Prahlad Yadav S/o Latel Yadav Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Farhada, P.S. Kharora, Present R/o New Basti, Rajatalab, House Of Jubeda, P.S. Civil Line, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Appellant(s)
versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Line, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Saurabh Dangi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
24.06.2025
1. Heard Mr. Saurabh Dangi, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondent / State.
2. This criminal appeal filed by the appellant/accused under Section
374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.01.2024 passed by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in Session Case No. 97/2020 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine amount of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 06 months.
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused Prahlad Yadav was married to the deceased Tarabai alias Pinky. They have a two and a half year old son Vedkumar. The accused used to work as a labourer in the city and his wife Tarabai alias Pinky used to work as a maid in the locality. His wife used to talk a lot on the phone and they often quarreled over this issue. He suspected that his wife was having an affair with someone else. On the night of the incident dated 13.12.2019, they were arguing about their relationship till late at night and a quarrel broke out between them. The accused picked up a small LPG cylinder and hit his wife Tarabai alias Pinky on her head three-four times, due to which, blood started oozing out of her head and she died. He himself went to the police station and lodged a report. On the said report, a crime was registered and the case was taken into investigation. During the investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded. A purple colour cover with white print, two pieces of broken bangle, pillow, one piece of bazaaru earring, 05 litre gas cylinder, one piece of knife were seized from the crime scene as per the seizure sheet. Post-mortem of the deceased's body was conducted, the seized gas cylinder and knife were interrogated by a doctor. The seized items and viscera were deposited in FSL Raipur for examination.
4. After completing other proceedings of investigation, the charge-
sheet was presented for trial in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, Chhattisgarh on 09.03.2020, after which the case was handed over to the Sessions Court, Raipur, District, Chhattisgarh on 13.03.2020, after which this Sessions Case No.
97/2020 was registered.
5. The accused was read out the charge under Section 302 IPC, which he denied. A total of 15 witnesses were examined by the prosecution, thereafter the accused was examined under Section 313 (1) (b) CrPC. On this the accused declared himself to be innocent and that he had been falsely implicated and expressed his desire to give defence evidence in his defence.
6. On behalf of the defence, statement of defence witness Ramshila Yadav (DW-01) was recorded but no document was presented in her defence.
7. The learned trial Court, upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record opining that it is the appellant who has committed the murder of his wife, convicted and sentenced him under Section 302 of the IPC, against which the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred.
8. Mr.