2026:CGHC:3778-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 634 of 2017 Tika Ram Nishad @ Tikam S/o Chait Ram Nishad, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Atariya, Kukurmuda, Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

---Appellant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Of Police Station Kharsia, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondent For Appellant :- Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For State :- Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board

22/01/2026 Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by the appellant herein against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27/02/2017 passed by learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Case No. 124/2016 whereby he has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 5 months.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the intervening night of 27-28/07/2016, the appellant herein assaulted Santosh Nishad, while he was sleeping in Truck bearing Registration No. CG 13 LA 4893, with a jackrod and caused his death and thereby, committed the aforesaid offence.

3. Further case of the prosecution is that Santkumar Yadav (P.W.-3), working at Jaibaba Transport Company, reported about the incident at Police Station Kharsiya pursuant to which zero dehati nalishi was registered vide Ex. P/30 and zero merg intimation was registered vide Ex. P/31. Thereafter, on 28/07/2016, merg intimation No. 64/16 was registered vide Ex. P/25. Nazri naksha was prepared vide Ex. P/3 and inquest was conducted vide Ex. P/5. First information report was registered against the appellant vide Ex. P/26. The dead body of deceased Santosh Nishad was subjected to postmortem which was conducted by Dr. Sajan Kumar Agrawal (P.W.-11) and as per the postmortem report (Ex. P/21), cause of death is said to be coma and shock due to injury over neck and brain and nature of death is said to be homicidal. Memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded vide Ex. P/6 and his blood-stained shirt was seized vide Ex. P/7. Jackrod and a blood-stained towel were seized from the Trailer vide Ex. P/11. Though the seized articles were sent for forensic examination, but no FSL report has been brought on record. After due investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC which was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant abjured his guilt and entered into defence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and brought on record 38 documents. Statement of the appellant was taken under Section 313 of CrPC wherein he denied guilt, however, he examined none in his defence and only brought one document on record.

5. Learned trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, finding the appellant to be author of crime in question, proceeded to convict him for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid.

6. Mr. Govind Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant has been convicted on extremely doubtful evidence of last seen together and except that, there is no other evidence on record to involve the appellant in the alleged commission of offence. He would further submit that the evidence of Khem Kumar Sahu (P.W.-5) is that the deceased had come to purchase eatables in the dhaaba and he claims to have seen the appellant sitting inside the Truck parked about 60-70 feets away and the appellant and the deceased consuming liqour near the water tank about 80-90 feets away in the night, but thereafter, as per the evidence of Devram Yadav (P.W.-8), the deceased had come for loading the Truck in the pla