Ganpat Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2618 Chatt

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                    Order Sheet
                                  CRA No. 431 of 2020
  • Ganpat Singh S/o Shiv Mangal Singh Aged About 22 Years Caste Gond, R/o
    Village Tulsi (Baigapar) Thana Jainagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
  • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Jai Nagar, District Surajpur,
    Chhattisgarh.                                           ---- Respondent

29-09-2021 Mr. Deepak Jain, counsel for the appellant/s.

Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, PL for the State/respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 02/2020 application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 07.12.2020 passed by the First

Upper Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur, CG in Sessions Case

No. 02/2017.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the appellant

has been involved in alleged commission of offence only on suspicion

because the appellant's wife had sustained burn injuries in the

matrimonial house. He would argue that there was no dying declaration

recorded by the Executive Magistrate. The evidence of oral dying

declaration are given by the interested witnesses and therefore, they are

not reliable because evidence is that the deceased was extensively

burned and had serious breathing problem and therefore, it is

improbable that she could have given oral dying declaration to anybody regarding the incident. It is also submitted that the Smt. Ram Bai (PW-8)

and Hari Prasad (PW-11) have stated that the deceased had disclosed

that she died because of an accident and at that time after the incident

of burning the husband/appellant came from outside and attempted to

extinguish fire.

On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose and

submit that the evidence on record proves that the deceased sustained

burn injuries in her matrimonial house and the room was locked which

was opened by using a crowbar and both the appellant and the

deceased were found inside the room. The oral dying declaration has

been given by the deceased not only to her father but also to

independent witnesses including the doctors who treated her. The

medical evidence proves death due to burning and presence of

kerosene, which was also found and seized from spot during

investigation and proved during trial.

Taking into consideration the nature of evidence particularly the

evidence with regard to the nature of death and the place where the

deceased was found burning in the matrimonial house, presence of her

husband and the oral dying declaration given by the deceased to

doctors, no case is made out for grant of bail. Therefore, we do not find

a case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, application is

therefore, rejected.

List this appeal for final hearing.

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