2026:CGHC:9961-DB MANPREET KAUR D M i A g N ita P l R ly E s E ig T n K e A d U b R y NAFR Date: 2026.02.27 13:11:29 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1367 of 2022 The State Of Chhattisgarh Through - District Magistrate, District -

Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus Ashok Kumar Yadav S/o Shankarlal Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o High School Sector Cooperative Line Ward No.09, Dalli Rajhar At Present R/o Shaheed Chowk Ward No. 14 Dallirajhara, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shobhit Kosta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

26.02.2026

1. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in compliance to the Court’s order dated 19.02.2026, the accused / respondent Ashok Kumar Yadav is present before this Court.

2. By way of present petition filed under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C., the State has sought leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 08.04.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Special Case No. 22/2021 by which, the respondents / accused have been acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 302 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that, on 26.04.2021 a marriage ceremony was being held at the house of Balsingh Guruji in Village Harrotola, Police Station Mohla, District Rajnandgaon. On the same night at about 11:30 p.m., the complainant Chainsingh Koreti along with deceased Thansingh Tekam was returning home after attending the ceremony. It was alleged that due to a previous dispute during the marriage function, the accused Ashok Kumar Yadav came driving Swift car bearing registration No. CG 07 MB 8692 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against them. It was further alleged that after moving some distance, the accused reversed the vehicle with an intention to kill, resulting in grievous internal injuries to Thansingh Tekam, who died on the way to the hospital.

4. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, Dehati Nalishi and Dehati Merg Intimation were registered and thereafter formal FIR was recorded. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(v)

of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the accused.

5. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses in support of its case.

However, upon appreciation of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court held that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally caused the death of the deceased by driving the vehicle in the alleged manner and consequently acquitted the accused of the charges.

Hence this appeal.

6. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned judgment of acquittal is erroneous, unreasonable and contrary to the settled principles of law. The learned trial Court has committed a grave error in acquitting the respondent from the offences charged, as the findings recorded are contrary to the evidence available on record. It is contended that the trial Court failed to properly appreciate the consistent and cogent statements of the eye- witnesses, particularly P.W.-1 (Chain Singh Koreti) and P.W.-9 (Narottam Das Tekam). P.W.-1 has categorically deposed before the Court that the accused was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and deliberately dashed him and the deceased owing to a prior dispute at the wedding ceremony, as a result of which the deceased sustained grievous injuries on vital parts and succumbed thereto. His testimony has been duly corroborated by P.W.-2, P.W.-3, P.W.-4, P.W.-5, P.W.-6, P.W.-9 and P.W.-12. It is further submitted that the trial Court failed to appreciate the medical evidence of Dr.