Chattisgarh High Court
Shivkumar Kunjam vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:13051
CHANDRAKANT
DEWANGAN
NAFR
Digitally signed
by
CHANDRAKANT
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Date:
2026.03.19
14:46:53 +0530
ACQA No. 111 of 2023
• Shivkumar Kunjam S/o. Late Shri Ramprasad Kunjam, Aged About
34 Years, R/o. Village Chuchrugpur, Thana And Tahsil Charama,
District North Bastar Kanker (Chhattisgarh).
... Appellant
versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate Kanker, District
North Bastar (Chhattisgarh).
2. Hemraj Darro S/o. Shri Ratiram Darro, Aged About 34 Years, R/o.
Village Erechuwa, Thana And Tahsil Charama, District North Bastar
Kanker (Chhattisgarh).
3. Rajesh Darro S/o. Shri Ratiram Darro, Aged About 37 Years, R/o.
Village Erechuwa, Thana And Tahsil Charama, District North Bastar
Kanker (Chhattisgarh).
4. Rammanohar Darro S/o. Shri Ratiram Darro, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o. Village Erechuwa, Thana And Tahsil Charama, District North
Bastar Kanker (Chhattisgarh).
... Respondents
For Appellant : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Respondent No.1/State : Ms. Sonia Kuldeep, Panel Lawyer
For Respondents No. 2 to 4 : Mr. Premshankar Yadav, Advocate
appears on behalf of Mr. Virendra
Kashyap, Advocate.
2
SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal
Judgment On Board
18/03/2026
1) This appeal has been preferred by the Complainant under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 20/02/2023, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kanker, District North Bastar (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No.10/2021, whereby, the respondents have been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323/34 and 506 Part-II of IPC.
2) From perusal of the record, it appears that a written report (Ex.P-1) was lodged by the complainant- Shivkumar on 29/08/2019 before the Police Station Charama, District Kanker, alleging inter-alia, that when he was cultivating his land on 29/08/2019 alongwith his labourers, namely, Kapilram Kemro, Madan Kemro, Dharmedhra Sinha, Lakhan Kosariya, Laleshwar Yadav and Lokesh Mandavi, the respondents came around 11:30 AM, and said that why he is cultivating their land, then he told that it is his land, owing to which, they got annoyed and started assaulting his labourers, namely, Dharmedhra Sinha, Lakhan Kosariya and Kapilram Kemro with hands and fists, while abusing with filthy words and threatened to kill and, based upon which, an FIR (Ex.P-2) was registered against them for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506 Part-II and 323/34 of IPC and, the respondents have, thus, been charge- 3 sheeted with regard to the alleged offence, which was denied by them and claimed to be tried.
3) In order to establish the allege allegation, the complainant, namely, Shivkumar was examined as PW-1 and it appears from his testimony that on the said fateful day, when he was cultivating the land alongwith his labourers, the respondents came and said that why are you cultivating their land, owing to which, the respondent- Rammanohar got annoyed and started abusing him with filthy words in the name of mother and dashed him and at that particular point of time, his labourers, namely, Kapilram Kemro, Dharmedhra Sinha, Lakhan Kosariya, Laleshwar Yadav and Lokesh Mandavi, came for his rescue, but they were also abused by the respondents Rammanohar and Ratiram. Further of his testimony would reveal the fact that the respondents Rammanohar and Ratiram have assaulted Madan Kemro, Kapilram Kemro, Dharmedhra Sinha and Lakhan Kosariya, but the name of Madan Kemro was not disclosed by him in his written report (Ex.P-1). That apart, it reveals from para 9 of his cross-examination that on account of the alleged incident, a report was lodged by the respondents, owing to which, they have been charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 294, 323, 506 Part-II, 325 and 307 read with Sections 149 and 34 of IPC, apart from under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and were remain in jail for 3 months.
4
4) According to Kapilram Kemro (PW-2), who went to the land of Shivkumar for its cultivation, on the said fateful day, alongwith others, the respondents came around 11 to 11:30 AM and, the respondent-Rammanohar has caught hold the collar of the complainant-Shivkumar by saying that why are you cultivating his land and that by abusing in the name of mother, slapped him, owing to which, a scuffle took place between them and he alongwith others namely, Dharmendra Sinha and Madan, came for rescue. He has, however, not stated that he was assaulted by them, as alleged in the said report (Ex.P-1).
5) Madan Kemro (PW-3), who was also one of the labourer of the complainant-Shivkumar has said that on the said fateful day around 11:30 AM, the respondents came and stated to Shivkumar why he is cultivating his land and when the complainant told them that it is his land, they got annoyed and started abusing him with the filthy words and threatened to kill. He deposed further that all the respondents have assaulted him (Shivkumar) with hands and fists, who was rescued by Kapil, Dharmendra and Lakhan. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha (PW-4), who was the another labourer of the complainant has deposed in his evidence that the respondent-Rammanohar has caught hold the collar of the complainant-Shivkumar, owing to which, he, Lakhan Kosariya, Kapil Kemro went there for intervening and rescuing him, but they were also abused with filthy words and threatened to kill by them and, his shirt was torn on account of the alleged assault.
5
6) Laleshwar Kumar (PW-5), who was also the labourer, stated in his evidence that the respondents have abused the complainant with filthy words and have threatened him to kill and, deposed further that when Kapil Kemro, Dharmendra Sinha and Lakhan Kosariya went there for his recue, then they were also assaulted by the respondents. He deposed further that on account of the alleged assault, Kapil Kemro, Dharmendra Sinha and Lakhan Kosariya has sustained injuries. More or less is the statement of Lakhan Kosariya (PW-6) and Lokesh Kumar Mandavi (PW-7).
7) What is, therefore, reflected from their testimonies that, though, it was alleged by the complainant-Shivkumar in his written report (Ex.P-1), lodged on 29/08/2019, that on the said fateful day, when he was cultivating his land alongwith his labourers, the respondents abused his labourers, particularly Dharmendra Sinha, Lakhan Kosariya and Kapil Kemro and assaulted them with hands and fists. But the alleged of his version was, however, not found to be corroborated by other prosecution witnesses, as it reveals from their testimonies that the collar of him (Shivkumar) was caught hold by the respondent-Rammanohar while abusing him with filthy words and threatened to kill, which was not alleged by him in his said report (Ex.P-1). That apart, it appears from the statement of Laleshwar (PW-5), that the labourers of the complainant-Shivkumar, namely, Kapil Kemro, Dharmendra Sinha and Lakhan Kosariya have sustained injuries, but, according to the statement of Dr. Tejus Shah (PW-8), no external injuries were, however, found on their bodies, as revealed from their medical reports, marked as Ex.P-5, 6 Ex.P-6 and Ex.P-7. Besides, it was also revealed that in fact, complainant-Shivkumar and his labourers were faced the charges with regard to the report lodged by the respondent-Ratiram pertaining to the alleged incident, occurred on 29/08/2019. The trial Court, after taking note of those materials has, therefore, not erred in acquitting them from the commission of the alleged crime.
8) The appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Sd/-
(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Chandrakant