2025:CGHC:61432-DB NAFR Digitally signed by ANKIT A K N UM KI A T R KUMARSINGH SINGH D 20 a 2 te 5 : .12.17 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

17:06:25 +0530 CRA No. 147 of 2016 [Arising out of judgment dated 30.11.2015 passed in Special Sessions Trial No.74/2010 by the Special Judge (Prevention of Atrocities), Surguja at Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh.]



Rajesh Ram Lohar R/o Bhendal Ram Lohar, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village - Amera, Police Station - Shankargarh, District - Balrampur – Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

... Appellant versus 

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station - Shankargarh, District - Balrampur – Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent For Appellant :- Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :- Mr. Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Amit Buxy, Panel Lawyer.

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

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment On Board (17.12.2025)

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. Assail in the present criminal appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the CrPC preferred by the appellant herein, is to the legality, validity and correctness of the judgment dated 30.11.2015 passed by the Special Judge, (Prevention of Atrocities), Surguja at Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, in Special Sessions Trial No.74/2010, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of ₹100/-; in default of payment of fine, he has to undergo imprisonment for one year and also convicted for offence under Section 201 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer imprisonment for 3 years with fine of ₹500/-; in default of payment of fine, he has to undergo imprisonment for one year. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

Prosecution story:-

2. The case projected by the prosecution and accepted by the trial Court is that intervening night of 19.02.2009 to 20.02.2009 between 9:00 pm to 8:00 am, the appellant herein murdered Prafull Toppo by assaulting him with the help of stone and thereafter strangulated him. To screen himself from the offence, appellant thrown the dead body of the into the well of the deceased’s father and thereby committed the offences in question. Against the aforesaid incident, merg intimation and FIR were registered vide Exs.P/1 & P/1A, respectively. Nazari naksha and crime details form were prepared vide Exs.P/8 & P/11, respectively. Inquest proceedings (Ex.P/4) were conducted and the dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. Dead body of the deceased was subjected to postmortem by Dr. Joseph Lakra (PW-9), who prepared the postmortem report vide Ex.P/15. As per the postmortem report (Ex.P/15) cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia and shock due to throttling and head injury and homicidal in nature. Wheels of investigation started running and the appellant was arrested. Pursuant to memorandum statement of the appellant (Ex.P/12) his clothes and stone were seized vide Ex.P/13. Other articles were also seized.

3. After due investigation, appellant herein was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant / accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 18 documents, whereas, defence, in support of its case, has neither examined any witness nor exhibited any document. The statement of the appellant / accused was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him 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 appellant / accused for the offence as mentioned in the opening paragraph of the judgment, against which the instant appeal h