Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 20122

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Rahul Ahuja – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 814 of 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Saurabh Dangi
For the Respondents: Mr. S.S. Baghel

A conviction in a case based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable where the prosecution proves a complete chain of events, including the 'last seen' theory and incriminating recoveries, and the accused fails to provide any explanation under Section 313 of the CrPC for the incriminating evidence.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 25(1-B) and 27 - Criminal Appeal - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - Appreciating evidence of interested witnesses - Conviction based on recovery of weapon and clothes - Need for exclusive explanation under Section 313 of CrPC. (Paras 12, 29, 31)

(B) Evidence - Reliability of Witness - Witness related to victim is not automatically an interested witness - Evidence cannot be discarded solely on the ground of relationship unless bias or motive is established. (Para 29)

Facts of the case:
Appellant was convicted for the murder of the deceased following a recovery of a blood-stained knife and clothing pursuant to his memorandum statement. The prosecution relied on the last-seen theory and forensic evidence, while the appellant contended that the evidence was contradictory and the chain of circumstances incomplete.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction, noting that the prosecution proved the chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant offered no explanation for the incriminating recoveries during his Section 313 CrPC statement.

Issues: Whether the conviction based on circumstantial evidence and recoveries is sustainable in law.

Ratio Decidendi: When the prosecution establishes a complete chain of circumstances, including the last-seen theory and recovery of weapon bearing human blood, the burden shifts to the accused under Section 313 CrPC to provide a reasonable explanation; failure to do so justifies the conviction.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. overview of trial court conviction and appellate procedural context. (Para 1 , 2 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. establishment of facts and forensic basis for homicidal death. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. appellate review of whether the death was established as homicidal. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. evaluation of circumstantial evidence and testimony of related witnesses. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)
5. conclusion of appeal and rejection of arguments regarding insufficiency of evidence. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)

1. Heard Mr. Saurabh Dangi, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent.

2. This criminal appeal filed by the appellant/accused under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.12.2023, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 08 of 2020, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction under Section	Sentence
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’)	Rigorous imprisonment (for short, ‘R.I.’) for life and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 month R.I. more.
Section 25 (1-B) of the Arms Act	R.I. for 03 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 month R.I. more.
Section 27 of the Arms Act	R.I. for 03 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, 01 month R.I. more.
All the sentences will run concurrently.

3. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that Constable Rohit Sidar (PW-2), posted at D.D. Nagar Police Station and deployed on Tiger-02, was on duty from 9:00 p.m. on 13.08.2019 to 9:00 a.m. on 14.08.2019. At about 9:58 p.m., a Dial-112 call was received from informant Ajay Rathore of RDA Colony, Ghanshyam Nagar, Diprapara, reporting that a person was lying dead near KPS School, Sarona. Acting upon the information, Constable Sidar, accompanied by driver Chandra Kumar Yadav, proceeded to the spot in Tiger-02 vehicle (No. CG-0714). On reaching the location, they found a male aged approximately 20–22 years lying dead on the roadside with his intestines protruding from the abdomen, multiple holes in his shirt, and blood spread around the lower abdomen. The incident was immediately reported to D.D. Nagar Police Station, whereupon a preliminary report (Dehati Nalisi No. 0/19), vide Ex. P/2, was registered under Section 302 IPC against an unknown person.

4. Pursuant thereto, an inquest (Merg No. 0/19) was initiated. During the inquest proceedings, the deceased was identified as Raju Gupta. Consequently, a numbered inquest report (Merg No. 49/19) was registered, and investigation commenced. Based on the inquest findings, FIR No. 282/2019 was registered under Section 302 of the IPC against an unknown accused. The dead body was sent to Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, for postmortem examination.

5. During investigation, the accused persons were apprehended and interrogated. On the basis of their memorandum statements, and pursuant to their alleged confessional disclosures, the following articles were seized: a button-operated knife purportedly used in the commission of the offence, the Activa scooter of the deceased, blood stained soil, plain soil, viscera of the deceased, and other relevant items. The accused were arrested and their relatives informed accordingly. The seized articles were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur, for chemical examination. A spot map was also prepared by the police in association with the Patwari.

6. The dead body of the deceased was sent to Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Medical College, Raipur, for postmortem examination. Dr. Snigdha Jain Bansal (PW-9) conducted the postmortem vide Ex. P/18. Upon examination, she found an incised wound on the left side of the chin, followed by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 20122

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRamesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, JRahul Ahuja – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 814 of 2024

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Rahul Ahuja – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 814 of 2024