2026:CGHC:910-DB Digitally NAFR signed by ANKIT A K N UM KI A T R KUMARSINGH SINGH Date:

2026.01.08 17:58:47 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 825 of 2018 [Arising out of judgment dated 31.05.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No.127/2017 by the 8 ^th Additional Sessions Judge Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.]

1. Parmendra Gendle S/o Late Lakhan Gendle, aged about 38 years; 2. Khel Kumar Gendle S/o Late Lakhan Gendle, aged about 42 years;

Both are R/o Village Udgan, P. S. Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 

State of Chhattisgarh through the Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent For Appellants :- Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate.

For State-Respondent :- Vivek Mishra, Panel Lawyer.

Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment On Board (07.01.2026)

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.05.2018 passed by the 8^th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No.127/2017 by which the appellants herein namely Parmendra Gendle (A-1) and Khel Kumar Gendle (A-2) have been convicted for offence under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of ₹500/- each; in default of payment of fine, they have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

Prosecution story:-

2. The case projected by the prosecution and accepted by the trial Court is that on 14.06.2017 at about 4:00 pm at village Udgan, Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, two appellants herein along with 4 other acquitted co-accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, poured kerosene oil over the body of Manisha Gendle, wife of A-1 herein, and set her ablaze by which she suffered grievous injuries and died. Against the said act of the appellants merg intimations were registered vide Exs.P/32 & P/47. FIR was registered vide Ex.P/36. Nazari naksha and crime details form were prepared vide Exs.P/10 & P/12, respectively. Inquest proceedings (Ex.P/23) were conducted and the dead body of the deceased was subjected to postmortem. As per postmortem report (Ex.P/43) proved by Dr. Dharmendra Kumar (PW-26), cause of death was cardio respiratory failure due to shock as a result of burn injury.

Wheels of investigation started running and the appellant was arrested. Bedsheets and burnt wood were seized from the spot vide Ex.P/5. Other articles were also seized. Seized articles were sent for chemical analysis to FSL and as per FSL report (Ex.P/47) on the bedsheets and hairs & skin of the deceased kerosene oil was found.

3. After due investigation, appellants herein were charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellants /

accused persons abjured their guilt and entered into defence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, prosecution has examined as many as 28 witnesses and exhibited 47 documents whereas, defence, in support of its case, has not examined any witness, but exhibited 1 document. The statements of the appellants / 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.

5. The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, convicted the appellants / accused persons for the offences as mentioned in the opening paragraph of the judgment, against which the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants herein questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

Submission of the Parties:-

6. Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the trial Court is absolutely unjustified in invoking Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevi