2025:CGHC:58903 NAFR ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally signed by CRA No. 69 of 2000 ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA

1 - Suraj Kumar S/o Sadhram Aged About 24 Years Cultivators And R/o Village Bendrapali, Police Station Baramkela, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

2 - Sadhram (Died and Deleted) as per Hon'ble Court order dated

26.09.2018.

3 - Rambati (Died and Deleted) as per Hon'ble Court order dated

05.04.2023.

... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Baramkela.

... Respondent For Applicant : None appears For Respondent/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Judgment on Board

04/12/2025

1. When the matter is called out for hearing, none appears on behalf of the appellant to press this appeal. However, Ms. Smriti Shrivasava, Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No.1.

2. Considering the fact that the present appeal is old one, this Court deems it appropriate to hear the same finally, hence, this Court proceeds to hear the matter finally with the assistance of learned State counsel.

3. This Criminal Appeal has filed been under Section 374(2) of CrPC against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.11.2000 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Trial No. 75 of 1999, convicting all the three appellants for 7 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304B of I.P.C.

4. The prosecution case in brief is that on 17.04.1099, the accused Suraj Kumar had asked his wife, deceased Madhuri, to wash clothes. When she refused to do so, they had a quarrel. After this, the accused Suraj Kumar strangulated his wife to death and with the help of other accomplices, to make the murder look like a suicide, he tied a rope around the neck of the deceased and hanged her in the room inside the room. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged by Suraj Kumar at police station, Barmerkela. On the basis of which, Merg No. 6/99 was registered as Ex.P-19 by Assistant Sub-Inspector (PW-18). Thereafter, the investigation of incident was done by T.R. Koshima (PW-12), the then S.D.O.(R). After registration of Merg, during the course of investigation, the Panchnama of the dead body was prepared by the Investigating Officer and before preparing the Panchnama, notice was given to the witnesses as per Ex.P-2. After that in the presence of witnesses Gaurishankar, Shaduram, Indrajeet, Shivkumar and Latabai the inquest over the dead body was prepared as per Ex.P-3 and thereafter, the dead body of the deceased Madhuri sent for post-mortem to Primary Health Centre, Baramkela vide Ex.P-22. The post-mortem of the dead body of the deceased Madhuri was conducted by Dr.K.Maravi (PW-20), and his report was given as per Ex.P-21. In the post-mortem report, the doctor had opined that the death of the deceased Madhuri was due to throttling and it was homicidal in nature.

5. During the course of investigation, statements of the witnesses were recorded and when the death of the deceased was found to be in suspicious circumstances, FIR (Ex.P-21) was registered under Sections 302 and 304 read with Section 34 of IPC. Spot map was prepared by the concerned patwari (PW-19) vide Ex.P- 20 and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the four accused persons including the three appellants before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Sections 302, 304B, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.

6. Charges were framed against the accused, which were read over and explained to them. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined as many as 21 witnesses and exhibited several documents. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they denied all incriminating circumstances and pleaded innocence, choosing not to adduce any defence evidence.

7. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence

avai