State Of Chhattisgarh vs Bhadwa Korwa
2021 Latest Caselaw 1448 Chatt

                                                                 NAFR

         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                        CRMP No. 746 of 2021
     State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rajpur, District
      Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur,
      Chhattisgarh
                                                        ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
   1. Bhadwa Korwa S/o Jhirga Korwa Aged About 60 Years R/o
      Village Pendari, P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj
      Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh
   2. Budhram Korwa S/o Bhadwa Korwa Aged About 28 Years R/o
      Village Pendari, P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj
      Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh
   3. Madan Korwa S/o Late Mothni Korwa Aged About 45 Years R/o
      Village Pendari, P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj
      Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh
                                                      ---- Respondent




For the State      :-     Mr. Ravish Verma, GA.


      Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
         Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor,

   Order on Board by Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

29.07.2021 Heard on prayer for grant of leave to appeal.

Though learned State counsel would submit that there is

evidence of extra judicial confession given by accused Madan before

Jhuni Bai (PW-3), we find that according to PW-3 she claims to have

met Madan sometimes around Diwali festival in the year 2017 but the

FIR in the case was lodged in January, 2018 and she did not disclose

immediately to anyone much less police that any extra judicial

confession was made before her by Madan. The evidence of Sukhni

Bai (PW-1) and Dokoram (PW-2) - parents of the deceased is hearsay

as no extra judicial confession was made before them but they only

referred to Jhuni Bai (PW-3). There is nothing in the evidence to show

that this so called extra judicial confession was immediately disclosed

by Smt. Jhunibai (PW-3) to police. The date on which extra judicial

confession was made before her has not been specifically stated nor

she has stated as to on which date she disclosed such things to PW-1

and PW-2.

There is no other strong and circumstantial evidence. Recovery

of a club does not connect the accused with the commission of offence.

The allegation of murder based on extra judicial confession appears to

have been made months after the death. In this background, the

learned trial Court has found the allegation of murder extremely

doubtful and acquitted the accused by giving benefit of doubt. We find

that there is no patent illegality or perversity in the judgment impugned.

Given limited scope of interference against judgment of acquittal, we do

not find any merit.

CRMP is accordingly dismissed.

                  Sd/-                                             Sd/-
       (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava)                       (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
                  Judge                                          Judge
Ajay