Allowed

Madan Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 Jan 2023CRA/886/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal, acquitting the appellant of murder charges. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the crime, citing contradictions in eyewitness testimony regarding the weapon and unreliable forensic evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and conviction set aside; appellant acquitted of murder charge; bail bonds to remain in operation for six months under Section 437A CrPC.

Madan Chandrakar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 886 of 2013

¶4

Madan Chandrakar S/o Narad Chandrakar, Aged about 30 years, R/o Village Litipur, Chouki Dashrangpur, Police Station Pipariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh through Aarakshi Kendra Pipariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

---Respondent

¶9

For Appellant	:- Mr.	Rajat Agrawal, Advocate
For State	:- Mr.	Sudeep Verma, Dy. G.A.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 04/01/2023

¶11

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

¶12

This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by the appellant against impugned judgment dated 11/09/2013 passed by learned Session Judge, Kabirdham in Sessions Trial No. 21/2013 whereby he has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 6 months.

¶13

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 05/01/2013 in between 6AM to 7:30AM at village Litipur within the ambit of

¶14

¶15

Police Station Pipariya, the appellant assaulted Badri Chandrakar with wooden club due to which he suffered grievous injuries and died and he, thereby, committed the aforesaid offence.

¶16

Further case of the prosecution is that deceased Badri Chandrakar had lent a sum of Rs. 2000/- to the appellant as loan which he had asked him to return, but the appellant did not return the said amount on account of which dispute arose between them in the evening of 04/01/2013. Thereafter on 05/01/2013, deceased Badri Chandrakar left his home in his motorcycle bearing No. CG 07 IZ 8011 at about 6:30 AM to switch on the borewell. At about 7-7:30 AM, Vinod Sahu (P.W.-4) came to the house of the deceased and informed his father Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.-1) that his son Badri Chandrakar was lying on ground near the canal. Immediately thereafter, Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.-1) and his other son Jalesh Chandrakar (P.W.-2) went to the spot and found that Badri Chandrakar was lying on the ground and the gamcha around his neck was soaked in blood. There was an injury near his right ear from which blood was oozing and there was an injury on his right wrist, although he was alive at that time. When his father and brother were escorting the deceased to their home, he succumbed to death on the way. The incident was reported at the Police Station by father of the deceased namely Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.-1) pursuant to which merg intimation was registered vide Ex. P/2 and first information report was lodged against the appellant vide Ex. P/1. Summons were

¶17

¶18

issued under Section 175 of CrPC vide Ex. P/3 and in the presence of witnesses, inquest was conducted vide Ex. P/4 pursuant to which the dead body was subjected to postmortem which was conducted by Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12) and as per the postmortem report (Ex. P/14), cause of death is shock resulting from excessive hemorrhage (blood loss) from major (injured) blood vessels and the nature of death may be homicidal. Motorcycle of the deceased was seized vide Ex. P/8 at the instance of Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.1) and a blood stained gamcha was seized vide Ex. P/9 at the instance of Jalesh Chandrakar (P.W.-2). The appellant was thereafter taken into custody and on the basis of his memorandum statement (Ex. P/11), wooden club was seized from his possession vide Ex. P/12. The said wooden club was sent to Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12) for query and in the query report (Ex. P/19), the Doctor has opined that the injuries suffered by the deceased could have been caused by the said wooden club, however, he advised to send it for FSL. In FSL report (Ex. P/23), human blood was found in the said wooden club. After due investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC which was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant abjured his guilt and entered into defence.

¶19

In order to bring home the offence, prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses and brought on record 24 documents. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of CrPC was

¶20

¶21

taken wherein he denied guilt and he examined 2 witnesses and brought on record 1 document in his defence.

¶22

Learned trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, finding the death of deceased Badri Chandrakar to be homicidal in nature and further finding the appellant to the perpetrator of the crime in question, proceeded to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid.

¶23

Mr. Rajat Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that there is no evidence on record, either oral or documentary, to connect the appellant with the crime in question and the trial Court has erred in convicting the appellant relying upon the circumstantial evidence of memorandum and seizure as well as the FSL report in which human blood is said to be found in the wooden club allegedly seized from the appellant as when the said wooden club was firstly sent to Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12) for query wherein he has clearly stated that there were no blood like stains present on the said wooden club. Moreover, Kanta Chandrakar (P.W.-6), who is a witness to memorandum and seizure, has clearly stated in paragraph 3 of his statement that there was no stains in the said wooden club. As such, memorandum and seizure as well as the FSL report does not inspire full confidence and as such, they could not have been relied upon by the trial Court to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Thus, the

¶24

¶25

instant appeal be allowed and the appellant be acquitted of the charge levelled against him.

¶26

Per contra, Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned State counsel, would submit that prosecution has been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and as such, the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

¶27

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection.

¶28

The first question for consideration would be whether the death of deceased Badri Chandrakar was homicidal in nature ?

¶29

10. Learned trial Court has recorded an affirmative finding in this regard and has held that death of deceased Badri Chandrakar was homicidal in nature relying upon the postmortem report (Ex. P/14) which has been proved by Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12) who has clearly stated that cause of death is shock due to excessive blood loss resulting in hemorrhage and the nature of death is homicidal in nature. Looking to the injuries suffered by the deceased as well as considering the postmortem report (Ex. P/14) and the expert medical opinion of Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12), we are of the considered opinion that trial Court has rightly held the death of Badri Chandrakar to be homicidal in nature. We hereby affirm the

¶30

¶31

said finding recorded by the trial Court, more so, when it has not been seriously questioned by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶32

11. The next question for consideration is whether the appellant is the perpetrator of the crime in question and whether the trial Court has rightly convicted him for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC ?

¶33

12. There is no direct evidence available on record and the instant case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is the case of the prosecution that appellant had borrowed Rs. 2000/- from the deceased and he was not returning the said money on account of which they engaged in a quarrel and dispute in the evening of 04/01/2013 which was witnessed by brother of the deceased Jalesh Chandrakar (P.W.-2) and as such, the appellant had motive to commit the offence. However, it is pertinent to notice here that though dispute had arisen between the appellant and the deceased one day prior to the date of the incident but thereafter, the appellant as well as the deceased, both went to their respective houses. Thereafter, on the next day i.e. 05/01/2013 at about 06:30 AM, the deceased left his house in his motorcycle to go towards the canal to switch on the borewell and as per merg intimation (Ex. P/2), the incident occurred in between 06:30 to 07:15 AM and when the deceased was noticed lying near the canal by Vinod Sahu (P.W.-4), he was alive at that time and he succumbed to death while he was being escorted to his house by his father Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.-1) and brother Jalesh Chandrakar (P.W.-2).

¶34

¶35

As such, though on the previous day of the offence, some altercation took place between the appellant and the deceased on account of the money lent by the deceased to the appellant but it is not the case that pursuant thereof, the deceased went missing. Admittedly, as per the statement of father of the deceased Sonu Chandrakar (P.W.-1), deceased came back to his house on 04/01/2013 and he slept at night and thereafter, when he went towards the canal to switch on the borewell on the next morning, he was murdered. As such, the dispute between the appellant and the deceased cannot be said to be motive for offence and prosecution has not been able to establish it beyond reasonable doubt. Even if, the motive of offence was established by the prosecution, it is a weak piece of evidence and cannot be made the sole basis for conviction.

¶36

13. Now, the next circumstance that has been put forth by the prosecution and that has been found proved by the trial Court is seizure of wooden club from the appellant (Ex. P/12) pursuant to his memorandum statement (Ex. P/11), in which human blood has been found as per the FSL report (Ex. P/23).

¶37

14. Kanta Chandrakar (P.W.-6) is one of the seizure witnesses and though he has supported the case of the prosecution and has stated before the Court that seizure of wooden club was made from the appellant vide Ex. P/12 pursuant to his memorandum statement vide Ex. P/11, however, he has also clearly stated that the said wooden club was not stained with anything. Gaukaran (P.W.-15) is the second seizure witness

¶38

¶39

and he has also stated before the Court that the said wooden club was not stained with anything. Moreover, he has created a dent on the prosecution case by stating that the said wooden club was brought to the Police by the village kotwar after tracing it out. Not only this, Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.12) has clearly stated in paragraph 4 of the query report (Ex. P/19) that the said wooden club did not have any stains or marks, but surprisingly, in the FSL report (Ex. P/23), human blood has been found in the said wooden club, which has been relied upon by the trial Court to hold that appellant is the perpetrator of the crime in question.

¶40

15. The Supreme Court in the matter of The Supreme Court in the

¶41

matter of Balwan Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh 1 has held that if the recovery of bloodstained articles is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, and if the investigation is found to be tainted, then it may be sufficient if the prosecution shows that the blood found on the articles is of human origin though, even though the blood group is not proved because of disintegration of blood and observed in paragraph 24 as under :-

¶42

“24. In the instant case, then, we could have placed some reliance on the recovery, had the prosecution at least proved that the blood was of human origin. As observed supra, while discussing the evidence of PWs 9 and 16, the prosecution has tried to concoct the case from stage to stage. Hence, in the absence of positive material indicating that the stained blood was of human origin and of the same blood group as that of the accused, it would be difficult for the Court to rely upon the aspect of recovery of the weapons and tabbal, and such recovery does not help the case of the prosecution.”

¶43

1 (2019) 7 SCC 781

¶44

¶45

16. In the instant case, even though recovery has not been proved by the prosecution witnesses and even though according to Kanta Chandrakar (P.W.-6) and Dr. Narendra Golan (P.W.-12), the wooden club so seized was not stained with anything, but since human blood is said to be found on it as per the FSL report (Ex. P/23), the trial Court has found the said circumstance proved against the appellant, which is absolutely perverse and bad in law. Even though human blood is said to have been found on the said wooden club, but it is of no use to the prosecution and it would be difficult for the Court to rely upon the aspect of recovery of weapon, as such, recovery of said wooden club does not help the case of the prosecution as admittedly, there is no other piece of circumstantial evidence available on record which would constitute panchsheel principles of proving the case on the basis of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt as laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sharad

¶46

Birdhi Chand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra 2.

¶47

17. In view of the aforesaid analysis, we are of the considered opinion that prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that appellant is indeed the perpetrator of the crime in question. In that view of the matter, we hereby set aside the impugned judgment and conviction of the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and the sentenced so awarded. The appellant is acquitted of the charge levelled against him. Since he is on bail, he need not

¶48

2 1984 (4) SCC 116

¶49

¶50

surrender, however, his bail bonds shall remain in operation for a period of six months in view of the provision contained under Section 437A of CrPC.

¶51

18. Accordingly, this criminal appeal stands allowed.

¶52

Sd/Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Judge

¶53

Harneet

Madan Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Motilal Sahu @ Motiram Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Duleshwar Verma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Sombahadur Rana Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Raj Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nand Kishore Giri Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chitti Bai Dhargave Vs State of Chhattisgarh