2026:CGHC:3237-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 1708 of 2019 Dhaneshwar Sahu S/o Shiv Ram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Khajhri, P.S. Sarangarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ----Appellant (in Jail)

Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Sarangarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Appellant :- Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State :- Mr. Sharad Mishra, P.L.

[

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board

20/01/2026 Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by the appellant against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31/08/2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Raigarh in Sessions Trial No.

04/2018 whereby the appellant has convicted for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for six months and to undergo R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 3 months, respectively.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the intervening night of 9-10/12/2017 in between 12-1 AM at village Khajri within the ambit of Police Station Sarangarh, the appellant herein along with co-accused Shivram Sahu, in furtherance of their common intention, strangulated Ku. Chanda Yadav, with whom the appellant was having an affair, and caused her death and in order to screen themselves from the offence, buried her dead body inside a pit in the canal and thereby, committed the aforesaid offence.

3. Further case of the prosecution is that on account of the information given by Deepak Sahu (P.W.-16), after taking permission from the SDM, Sarangarh on 11/12/2017, the dead body was exhumed from the spot and dead body exhumation panchnama was prepared vide Ex. P/8 and it was identified by father of the deceased namely Kedar Yadav (P.W.-17) vide Ex. P/9. Dehati merg intimation was registered vide Ex. P/13, inquest was conducted vide Ex. P/4 and pursuant to recording memorandum statement of the appellant vide Ex. P/5, seizure of spade and shovel was made vide Ex. P/6 and P/7. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and the dead body was subjected to postmortem which was conducted by Dr. Ritesh Sen (P.W.-9) and as per the postmortem report (Ex. P/11), the cause of death is said to be asphyxia due to throttling and nature of death is said to be homicidal. After due investigation, the appellant herein was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of IPC and co- accused Shivram Sahu was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Section 201/34 of IPC, which were committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant as well as the co-

accused abjured their guilt and entered into defence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, prosecution examined as many as 24 witnesses and brought on record 30 documents. Statements of the appellant and the co-accused were recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein they denied guilt and they neither examined any witness nor brought any document on record.

5. Learned trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, though acquitted co- accused Shivram Sahu for offence punishable under Section 201/34 of IPC but proceeded to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302, 201/34 of IPC.

6. Mr. B.P. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the three incriminating circumstances cataloged by the trial Court in paragraphs 23-28 are not at all established and therefore, appellant is entitled for acquittal from the offence in question.

7. Per contra, Mr. Sharad Mishra, learned State counsel, would support the impugned judgment and would submit that prosecution has been able to bring home the offence beyond re