Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 24824
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, Radhakishan Agrawal, JJ
Radheshyam @ Babla Banjare – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2017
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Anil Tripathi
For the Respondents: Amit Buxy
Conviction based solely on the 'last seen together' theory is unsustainable without corroborating evidence or a minimal time gap, especially when recovery witnesses turn hostile and the chain of custody for forensic evidence is not established.
Headnote:(A) Circumstantial Evidence - Last Seen Together - Conviction cannot be based solely on the theory of 'last seen together' without other corroborating evidence or a sufficiently small time gap to rule out the possibility of any other person meeting the deceased. (Para 13, 14, 17, 19)
(B) Evidence - Corroboration - Recovery of articles pursuant to memorandum statements is unreliable and cannot be used to establish guilt when the seizure witnesses turn hostile. (Para 20)
(C) Forensic Evidence - Chain of Custody - Blood stains found on clothing seized after a significant delay and without evidence of safe custody are insufficient to prove guilt as the possibility of fabrication cannot be ruled out. (Para 21)
Issues: Whether the conviction based on the theory of 'last seen together' and disputed recoveries could be sustained in the absence of corroborating evidence and a proven chain of custody for forensic evidence.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of prosecution case and trial court conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding last seen theory and recoveries. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. confirmation that the death was homicidal. (Para 9) |
| 4. legal standards for relying on 'last seen together' theory. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. last seen theory not established due to time gap and lack of tip. (Para 19) |
| 6. recoveries and forensic evidence found unreliable. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 7. conviction set aside and appellants acquitted. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
(1) Invoking criminal appellate jurisdiction of this Court, two appellants herein have preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.09.2016, passed in Sessions Trail No.53/2014 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Radheshyam @ Babla Banjare and another) by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur (CG), whereby they has been convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 months each.
(2) The case of the prosecution, in short, is that in the intervening night of 11-12/10/2014, at Village Chataod, near Nursery in front of ruins of brick Bhata Jamin, Police Station Newra, the accused- appellants herein alongwith one juvenile co-accused (who has been acquitted by the trial Court), in furtherance of their common objection, assaulted Biselal, due to which, he suffered grievous injuries and died and, thereby, the appellants are said to have committed the aforesaid offences.
(3) It is further case of the prosecution that when the matter was reported to the police, merg. Intimation (Ex.P/02) and Fir (Ex.P/31) were registered and wheels of investigation started running, in which, summons under Section 175 of CrPC were sent vide Ex.P/14 and inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P/15. Site map was prepared vide Ex.P/01. The dead-body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. GR Agrawal (PW-13) and, as per PM report (Ex.P/19), cause of death of the deceased is excessive haemorrhage and shock due to injuries on vital organs and nature of death is homicidal. The appellants-accused were arrested vide Ex.P/27 & Ex.P/28 and their memorandum statements were recorded vide Ex.P/06 & Ex.P/08. Pursuant to the memorandum statement of appellant- Raheshyam (A-1), pass-book of the deceased, shirt, barmuda were seized vide Ex.P/07, whereas from appellant- Brajesh Kumar Sahu (A-2) shirt, paint were seized Ex.P/09. The seized articles were sent for chemical examination, as as per FSL report (Ex.P/31) stains of blood were found on the shirt seized from appellant-Brajesh Kumar Sahu (A-2). After statements of witnesses were recorded and due investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the appellant in the competent criminal court having jurisdiction and, thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which the appellant/accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence by stating that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated.
(4) The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited 32 documents part from Article-A & A/1, whereas the appellant-accused in support of their defence examined 03 witnesses and exhibited 04 documents.
(5) The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, proceeded to convict appellants herein for offence under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced them as mentioned herein-above, against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellants-accused questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence.
(6) Mr. Anil Tripathi, learned counsel
