Amar Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 834 Chatt

                                                                                 NAFR

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                               CRA No.495 of 2020

 •   Amar Singh S/o Gangaram Nagvanshi, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village - Chhatvan,
     Lukupali, Police Station Rajadeori, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

                                                                           ---- Appellant

                                       Versus

  • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Rajadeori, District Baloda Bazar,
    Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

                                                                        ---- Respondent

05.07.2021 Shri Akhilesh Mishra, Counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Shubham Verma, PL for the State/Respondent.

Heard on prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to

the appellant.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment

of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.12.2019 passed by the

learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda - Bazar (Chhattisgarh)

in Sessions Trial No.66/2017.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the

prosecution case is founded on extremely doubtful circumstantial

evidence and there is no witness. He would argue that the only

evidence of last seen is not reliable because according to prosecution

witness PW-14 though initially he had seen the appellant and the

deceased together, later on while he was returning, he saw the deceased lying injured on the road but the appellant was seen at some

distance. He would next submit that there is no clinching evidence

regarding group and origin of blood on all the articles which are alleged

to have been seized, therefore, the conviction is not sustainable in law.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes and submits

that the prosecution evidence of PW-14 is that the appellant and

deceased were seen together and later on the deceased was found

injured on the road and at some distance the appellant was also found

moving in his cycle. He would submit that from the blood stained soil

seized from the spot, full shirt, full pant of the appellant, axe and shirt of

the deceased all were found stained with blood, and human blood was

found on blood stained soil seized from the spot, shirt of the appellant

and shirt of the deceased, as also blood group of O found in the blood

stained soil seized from the sport and shirt of the appellant.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties

and particularly taking into consideration the evidence of last seen as

also the FSL report regarding presence of human blood, we do not

consider present to be a fit case for grant of bail, accordingly the

application is, therefore, rejected.

List this case for final hearing.

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


Yasmin