For Appellant : Mr.Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate
For Respondents : Mr.Sameer Rigri, Advocate holding the brief of
No.2 and 3 Mr.Ajay Chandra, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
1. The present acquittal appeal is directed against the judgment of
2. It transpires from the order sheet dated 01.12.2025 that bailable
warrant earlier issued against respondent No. 1 was received
unserved, as he does not reside at the given address. As per the
warrant, it has been reported that the accused/respondent No. 1 is
not residing at the said address. So far as respondents No. 2 and
3 are concerned, they are represented by their counsel, Mr. Samir
Rigri, holding the brief of Mr. Ajay Chandra, learned counsel, who
3. Considering the fact that the present appeal against the judgment
20.03.2013, and that the whereabouts of accused/respondent No.
1 could not be traced, while respondents No. 2 and 3 are duly
4. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 8.7.2011 at about 11:40 A.M.,
Garage. Upon reaching the spot, the police found that one Bablu
Bhatra had been tied up. On inquiry, the accused persons
etc., from the garage. Injury marks were found on his body. During
by the accused persons. Thereafter, Ajit Yadav, Station House
Information Report (Ex.P-16) in connection with the incident. A
merg intimation (Ex.P-13) was also recorded. Subsequently, a
accused persons at Police Station Kotwali. Bablu Kashyap was
treatment of his injuries, where he succumbed during treatment.
Postmortem was conducted by Dr.J.R. Shinde (PW-7) vide Ex.P-
2) Abrasions scattered over supero-lateral aspect of
right shoulder extending over postero-lateral aspect, of
10x8cm, reddish dark.
3) Abrasion over lateral aspect of upper part of right
arm, 3x2cm, reddish dark.
4) Contusion over cubital area of eight upper extremity,
6x3cm dark reddish.
5) Contusion over theaner aspect right palm, 5xccm
reddish black.
6) Abrasion over antero-lateral aspect of lower part of
chest on eight side of 7x1/2cm, reddish dark.
7) Contused abrasion over antero-lateral aspect upper
part of abdomen on right side, 5x3cm, reddish dark.
8) Contused abrasion over antero-lateral aspect of
waist on right side, 5X4cm, reddish dark.
9) Abrasion over upper pact of right leg, below the
knee, 3x1/2cm, reddish dark.
10) Contused lacerated wounds, two in number one
middle third of right leg anteriorly, of 1/2x1/4cm &
1/2x1/2cm & bone deep dried blood present.
11) Abrasions over anterior aspect of right ankle
7x0.2cm, reddish dark.
12) Abrasion over medial side of right foot on mattebar
region, 3x1cm, reddish dark.
13) Abrasions spread over the antero-lateral aspect of
left arm, 10x8cm, reddish dark.
14) Lineaer abrasion over left forearm anteriorly in
midline, 5x0.2cm, reddish dark.
15) Contusion over theaner aspect of left palm, 7x6cm,
reddish black.
16) Two lacerations of 1 1/2x1/2cm & 1/2x1/4 cm &
bone deep margins reddish black, lying over contused
abraded area of antero- lateral aspect of waist on left
side, 7x6 cm, reddish dark.
17) Abrasion spread over the anterolateral aspect of
upper part of abdomen on left side, 4x2cm, reddish
dark.
18) Contused lacerated wounds present over anterior
aspect of left ley over middle dried part, three in
numbers, 1/2x1/4 cm, 1/2x1/2cm & 1x1/2 cm - all
injuries bone deep with dried blood adherent & reddish
black margins.
19) Contused abrasions spread over the postero-
lateral aspect of left shoulder spread overe 13x10cm,
reddish dark.
20) Abrasions over inter scapular region of upper part
of back, 6x2cm, reddish dark.
21) Contused abrasion over postero-lateral aspect of
lower part of left scapular region, 8x4 cm, reddish dark.
22) Abrasion over postero-lateral aspect of left elbow,
9x0.2cm, reddish dark.
23) Contusion over doesal aspect of left hand, 3x2cm,
reddish dark.
24) Contused abrasions, five in numbers lying in
midline of lumbar part of back varying from 1/2x1/4 cm
to 1x1/2 cm, reddish dark.
25) Abrasions over lower part of back on lumbar region
of right side, 3/1/2cm, reddish dark.
26) Contusions spread over right buttock extending
below upto upper half of right thigh, of 38x14cm, dark
reddish.
27) Contusions spread over left buttock extending
below upto upper half of left thigh & also over antero-
lateral aspect of left thigh, 41x17cm, dark reddish.
28) Contused abrasion over popliteal region of left leg
posteriorly, 1/1/2cm, reddish dark."
5. The doctor has opined that the deceased died due to multiple
injuries caused by a blunt and hard object and the manner of
death was homicidal. On the basis of the memorandum statement
of accused Arshad Ali, an iron rod was recovered. A spot map
(Ex.P-10) of the place of occurrence was prepared. As per the
seizure memo (Ex.P-2), iron rod and a rope were seized from
accused Arshad Ali in the presence of witnesses. Statements of
witnesses were recorded as per their versions. The accused
persons were arrested and arrest memos were prepared. The
seized articles were sent, through the Superintendent of Police,
Bastar, Jagdalpur, for chemical examination to the State Forensic
Science Laboratory, Raipur. Upon completion of the investigation
and finding sufficient evidence, a charge-sheet under Section 302
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was filed against
the accused persons before the Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jagdalpur, who in turn, committed the case to the
Court of Sessions, from where the Second Additional Sessions
Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur received the case on transfer for trial.
6. The learned trial Court has framed the charges against the
accused persons and after appreciating oral and documentary
evidence available on record by the impugned judgment of
acquittal has acquitted the respondents from the charges under
Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Hence, this acquittal
appeal.
7. Learned Government Advocate for the appellant/State submits
that learned Trial Court has erred in acquitting the respondents.
Learned Trial Court has based its findings on mere surmises and
conjectures, without proper appreciation of the evidence on
record. He further submits that learned Trial Court has further
erred in overlooking the fact that the prosecution has established
its case beyond all reasonable doubts. The Trial Court has further
erred in failing to place reliance on the statements of prosecution
witnesses who have fully supported the prosecution case. He also
submits that the Trial Court has erroneously relied upon the
statements of the prosecution witnesses to arrive at a finding of
acquittal, without due consideration of the corroborative evidence
and material collected during the investigation. It is respectfully
submitted that the Trial Court ought to have placed reliance upon
the evidence collected by the prosecution and the statements of
the prosecution witnesses, and, on such proper appreciation of
evidence, ought to have convicted the respondents/accused
persons for the offences committed by them. As such, the
acquittal appeal deserves to be allowed and the judgment of
acquittal passed by learned Trial Court l deserves to be set aside.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents
No.2 and 3 supports the impugned judgment of acquittal and
submits that learned Trial Court considering the material available
on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses has rightly
acquitted the respondents/accused, which warrants no
interference by this Court.
9. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties,
perused the impugned judgment of acquittal and records of the
trial Court.
10. It is observed by learned trial Court in para 5 of its judgment that
Abhishek Kulkarni (PW-1) stated that he does not know the
accused persons present in the Court. He knew the deceased
Bablu Kashyap, who has since passed away, but he has no
knowledge regarding the cause of Bablu's death. Similarly, Arun
Kumar Soni (PW-2) made the same statement. Amit Kumar
Kashyap (PW-3) stated that he does not know the accused
persons and also does not know the deceased Bablu Kashyap.
He was merely passing by the hospital and is unaware of the
events that occurred there. The police approached him and asked
him to sign. Prem Sehgal (PW-4) stated that he does not know the
accused persons and that no seizure was made in his presence.
However, his signatures appear on the memorandum (Ex.P-1),
seizure memos (Exs.P-2 and P-9), and the spot map (Ex.P-10).
Even in the statements of these witnesses recorded for the
prosecution, no evidence has been adduced linking the accused
to the crime. Kunti Kashyap (PW-11) stated that she knows the
accused persons and also knew the deceased Bablu Kashyap,
who was her brother. She stated that the police admitted her
brother to the hospital, and when she reached there, her brother
had already died. In her cross-examination, she clarified that she
did not see anyone assaulting Bablu at Bharat Garage.
11. The trial Court in para 6 of its judgment has stated that Dr.
Mahendra Prasad (PW-8) stated that on 06.07.2011, Bablu
Kumar, son of Sukhdev, resident of Hikmidhara, Jagdalpur, was
brought by Head Constable No. 233 Jitendra Samarth of Police
Station Kotwali for medical examination. Only four injuries were
observed on his body, as confirmed in the report (Ex.P-11). No
other injuries were present. X-rays were advised to ascertain the
nature of the injuries. The injuries were consistent with a hard and
blunt object. Dr. J.R. Sidhe (PW-7) stated that on 08.07.2011, the
deceased Bablu Kashyap was brought before him by Constable
No. 1278 T.N. Goyal of City Kotwali for post-mortem examination.
Multiple injuries were observed on the body, all ante-mortem in
nature, caused by a hard and blunt object. In his opinion, the
cause of death was multiple injuries inflicted by a hard and blunt
weapon, and the death was homicidal. The post-mortem indicated
that death had occurred 12 to 18 hours prior. His report is Ex. P-
14, bearing his signature.
12. The trial Court in para 7 of its judgment has observed that
Sanjeev Singh, Constable No. 458 (PW-6), stated that Head
Constable Ramnath Bairagi handed him a slip regarding the death
of Bablu at Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur, which was submitted at
the police station. Sub-Inspector G.L. Khare (PW-4) recorded the
mortuary intimation regarding Bablu's death (Ex.P-13). The
Station House Officer, Jagdalpur, SP Bhagat (PW-9), registered
the First Information Report (Ex.P-15). Inspector Ajit Yadav
(PW-10) initiated proceedings against the accused based on the
mortuary intimation and recorded an unnumbered First
Information Report (Ex.P-16). It is further observed that no dying
declaration of the deceased was conducted while he was alive.
The mortuary intimation (Ex.P-13) recorded the cause of death as
"unknown, possibly poison." It is speculative to attribute Bablu's
death to the accused persons. None of the prosecution witnesses
made any statement against the accused in this regard. Even
during cross-examination, no evidence linking the accused to the
crime was elicited. Kunti Kashyap, who claims to be the deceased
Bablu's sister, also stated in her cross-examination that she did
not witness any assault on Bablu by the accused.
13. In light of the above, the Trial Court has concluded that the
prosecution has failed to establish the commission of an offence
punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC
against the accused Arshad Ali, Javed Khan Qureshi @ Mustafa
Qureshi, and Intzar Khan. Accordingly, the accused are acquitted
of the charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
14. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties, perusing the statements given by the prosecution
witnesses and the finding recorded by the Trial Court while
acquitting the respondents from the charge under Section 302
read with Section 34 of the IPC, we are of the considered opinion
that learned Trial Court has not committed any illegality or
irregularity. We do not find any force in this acquittal appeal.
15. Accordingly, the acquittal appeal, being devoid of merit, is liable to
be and is hereby dismissed. Since this Court has dismissed the
acquittal appeal, bailable warrant issued against
accused/respondent No. 1 stands cancelled.
16. A certified copy of this judgment along with record be sent to the
concerned Trial Court forthwith for information and follow up
action.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Bablu
