Allowed

Ghanshyam Verma @ Raja Verma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Nov 2024CRA/640/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the appellant's appeal, acquitting him of murder charges. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant killed the deceased, noting inconsistencies between the prosecution case (strangulation) and forensic evidence (poisoning), and absence of proof regarding the appellant's last seen轨迹. The conviction was s

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment is set aside; the appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 302 of IPC and set free; directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs.25,000 under Section 437-A of CrPC.

Ghanshyam Verma @ Raja Verma Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 14

2024:CGHC:44710-DB

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 640 of 2020

¶6

Ghanshyam Verma @ Raja Verma S/o Shri Tejram Verma, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Grasim Cememt Ravan Police Station Suhela, District Baloda Bazar (Bhatapara) City Chhattisgarh. Present AddressPanchvati Nagar Kampa, House Of Sajjad Menon, Behind Dena Bank, Police Station Pandari (Mova), District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pandari, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Appellant : Ms. Nirupma Bajpai, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey &

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, JJ

¶14

Judgment On Board

¶15

Per Rajani Dubey, J

¶16

18/11/2024

¶17

Challenge in this appeal is to the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.3.2020 passed

¶18

2 / 14

¶19

by First Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in ST No.212/2018 whereby the appellant stands convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/- with default sentence of one month's RI.

¶20

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 4.7.2018 complainant Kumari Manju Patel lodged a missing report at Police Station - Pandri to the effect that on 30.6.2018 at around 8.30 pm her younger sister Ku. Revti Patel left for her job but didn't return home since then. Thereafter, one Sajjad Memon lodged a report that Raja Verma (appellant herein) was living on rent in Room No.1 of the first floor of his house with Revti Patel as husband and wife. However, on 4.7.2018 at around 1.30 pm when he went to the terrace for drying the clothes, he noticed stink emanating from Room No.1 which was locked from outside and flies were buzzing there. Thereupon, the police reached the spot and after breaking open the lock found dead body of Revti Patel lying in the room.

¶21

On postmortem examination of the dead body, the doctor suspected the cause of death to be poisoning. The clothes, slide and viscera of the deceased were preserved and sent to FSL for chemical examination. During merg enquiry, statements of Ku. Manju Patel, Omprakash and Sajjad Memon were recorded which revealed that deceased Revti Patel was a nurse by profession and Ghanshyam

¶22

3 / 14

¶23

Verma was working as driver who committed her murder on 1.7.2018 in the night in her room and fled. Thereafter, the accused sent a message from the mobile phone of the deceased to Virendra Kumar Patel, son of maternal uncle of the deceased, on his mobile phone that his sister Revti Patel has been murdered by Sajjad at Mova Kanpa, Behind Dena Bank and he should go there immediately with Mova police.

¶24

During investigation, the accused/appellant was taken into custody on 6.7.2018 and his memorandum Ex.P/5 was recorded wherein he disclosed that there was affair between the deceased and himself for the last 7-8 years; they were living on rent in the house of Sajjad Memon and whenever he asked the deceased for marriage, she would refuse, therefore, on 1.7.2018 at around 8.30 pm when she refused for marrying him, out of anger he committed her murder by pressing her neck with hands and thereafter with the help of charger cable. He also disclosed that before committing her murder he wrote about commission of suicide on a note book and after her murder, wrote about her murder. He also stated that after murder of Revti, he tried to commit suicide by holding the electric wife but MCB tripped. At his instance, the said note book and charger cable were seized from his house in presence of witnesses vide Ex.P/6. On examination by the handwriting expert, it was reported that the said notes were written by the accused himself. Further case of the prosecution is that as per FSL report human spermatozoa was found in the vaginal slide of the deceased sent for examination and organophosphorus methyl

¶25

4 / 14

¶26

parathion insecticide was found in her viscera. After completion of investigation, charge sheet under Section 302 of IPC was filed against the accused/appellant followed by framing of charge by learned trial Court accordingly, which was abjured by him and he prayed for trial.

¶27

In order to substantiate its case the prosecution examined 14 witnesses in all. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. However, he did not examine any witness in defence.

¶28

After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.

¶29

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the material available on record. The main witnesses of the case are though close relatives of the deceased and interested witnesses but despite that there are contradictions in their evidence. According to Sajjad Memon (PW-8) the deceased was living with the appellant in his rented accommodation whereas on the other hand, PW-2 Manju Patel, sister of the deceased, had lodged a missing report stating that the deceased did not return home after leaving for duty on 30.6.2018.

¶30

5 / 14

¶31

There is also no evidence regarding tenancy of the appellant in the house of PW-8 as neither any agreement was produced nor recovered from possession of the appellant.

¶32

Most importantly, it is the case of the prosecution that the appellant strangulated the deceased to death by pressing her neck with hands and thereafter with the help of charger cable whereas postmortem report (Ex.P/15) and FSL report (Ex.P/34) go to show that she died as a result of poisoning. Further, PW-9 Dr. Shivnarayan Manji in his evidence admits that he did not notice any sign of strangulation on the body of the deceased. Even the nature of death, whether it was homicidal or suicidal, has been proved by the prosecution. There is no complete chain of circumstantial evidence which could unerringly point towards guilt of the appellant and therefore, the appellant deserves to be acquitted of the charge by giving him benefit of doubt.

¶33

Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ratnu Yadav Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2024) 7 SCR 466 .

¶34

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the contention of the appellant submits that in view of the conduct of the appellant, the report of handwriting expert and other oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 of IPC which calls for no interference by this Court.

¶35

6 / 14

¶36

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶37

It is clear from the record of learned trial Court that the appellant was charged under Section 302 of IPC and the prosecution in order to prove its case examined 14 witnesses in all. After appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record the learned trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC for committing murder of Revti Patel by strangulation.

¶38

PW-1 Omprakash Patel, brother of deceased Revti Patel, states that when one SMS was received by Virendra in his mobile that Revti Patel has been murdered in the house of Sajjad, then they lodged report at the police station. He admits his signature on the inquest notice Ex.P/1, inquest Ex.P/2 and Supurdnama Ex.P/3. In crossexamination he admits that he did not read the message received by Virendra in his mobile and is stating at the behest of Virendra.

¶39

PW-2 Manju Patel, sister of the deceased, also states that on 2.7.2018 Viru Patel received a message on his mobile from the mobile of Revti Patel that Revti has been murdered behind Dena Bank and he informed her about this message. Though they searched for Revti Patel accordingly but could not find her and therefore, a missing report was lodged. However, later on her dead body was found in the house of Sajjad, there were maggots on the dead body and it was stinking.

¶40

7 / 14

¶41

PW-3 Virendra Kumar Patel, brother of the deceased, states that on 2.7.2018 he received a message from mobile phone of Revti on his mobile no.98271-15994 that " Apki bahan revati patel mova kanpa dena bank ke piche sajjad ke mar diya hu mova police ko lekar chale jana ". He states that the police seized his mobile and print out of the said message is Article A-1.

¶42

PW-5 Sheikh Danis, witness to memorandum Ex.P/5 and seizure Ex.P/6, supporting the case of the prosecution case states that as per memorandum of the appellant, the police seized charger at the instance of the appellant. PW-7 Sheikh Anis states the accused/appellant was living on rent in the house of Sajjad.

¶43

PW-8 Sajjad Memon states that the accused/appellant was his tenant in the first floor of his house and he was living there with his wife Revti. On 3.7.2018 when he went to the terrace for dying the clothes, he noticed foul smell emanating from the room of the appellant and when he peeped into the room, he saw flies buzzing inside the room and therefore he informed about the same to the police. When the police entered the room after breaking open the lock, the dead body of Revti was found there. In cross-examination he admits that later on he came to know that the appellant and Revti were in live-in relationship.

¶44

PW-9 Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased on 5.7.2018 and noticed certain symptoms/injuries on her body and opined as under:

¶45

8 / 14

¶46

"Received a dead body of female, in a polythene sheet, wearing yellow & black kurti, brownish leggings, grey underwear, all clothings are soaked with decomposion fluid. Body is in mild to moderate stage of decomposition. Face identifiable, both eye colleped face bloated up. Skin intact. Epidermis has peeled off on at places, mostly on pressed all over body, genitalia swollen up but intact, anal canal protruding out. Maggots crawling all over body size 01 cm.. Abdominal wall & thoracic cavity intact. Blackish, brownish decomposed fluid coming out from nostrils & mouth. Tongue protruding out from teeth margins for 2.5 cm.

¶47

External Injuries :-

¶48

Contusion present on lower lip left side of mucosal surface against teeth. ie lateral incisor & canine teeth.

¶49

Contusion present on tip of nose & left ala.

¶50

Red color ecchymosis present on occipital region

¶51

04 cm. diameter area over external occipital protuberance.

¶52

All injuries are shows red colour ecchymosis.

¶53

Injuries were caused with hard & blunt object.

¶54

Opinion :

¶55

Cause of death remains open.

¶56

Evidence of poison present which is suspected to be the cause of death.

¶57

Final cause of death given after receiving all reports. However viscera preserved for chemical analysis.

¶58

Duration of injuries were within 12 hours prior to death.

¶59

Duration of death is within 02-04 days prior to postmortem examination.

¶60

Manner & mode of death cannot be opined due to putrefaction.

¶61

9 / 14

¶62

All the findings are to be correlated with the circumstantial evidence."

¶63

In cross-examination, the doctor admits that he did not find any internal or external injury on the neck of the deceased and also did not notice any symptom of strangulation on her body.

¶64

PW-10 Ramnarayan Verma, Head Constable, states that on 4.7.2018 Manju Patel lodged a missing report regarding Revti Patel which was recorded in the Rojnamcha Sanha vide Ex.P/16.

¶65

PW-12 Awadh Jain, Nodal Officer of Vodaphone Idea Ltd., states that his company received a letter (Ex.P/18) from the police for providing call details of mobile No.73544-17465 of deceased Revti Patel. As per office record, the said number was issued in the name of Revti Patel and the subscriber detail is Ex.P/19 which was issued by his office. As sought by the police, call details from 30.6.2018 to 4.7.2018 were provided vide Ex.P/20 and according to these call details, on 2.7.2018 at 5:00:30 one SMS was sent from mobile No.73544-17465 to mobile No.98271-15944 which was duly delivered. He also proved the certificate issued under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act vide Ex.P/21.

¶66

PW-13 Sonal Gwala, Investigating Officer, admitted that as per FSL report (Ex.P/34) poison was found in the viscera of the deceased. He also admits that he had sent a query letter to autopsy surgeon Dr. Manjhi but did not produce the same.

¶67

10 / 14

¶68

Close scrutiny of the evidence makes it clear that the present is a case based on circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that where the case rests upon circumstantial evidence, the prosecution is required to fulfill the following conditions:

¶69

The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established;

¶70

The facts so established should be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt and the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty;

¶71

The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency;

¶72

They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and

¶73

There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.

¶74

In the case in hand, none of the witnesses has stated about the appellant being last seen together with the deceased. No witness has stated that the appellant was present at the place of occurrence before death of the deceased. PW-8 Sajjad, owner of the house where the appellant is stated to be living on rent with the deceased, also did not

¶75

11 / 14

¶76

state that before her death, he saw the appellant and the deceased together.

¶77

According to the autopsy surgeon (PW-9 Dr. Shivnarayan Manjhi) vide PM report (Ex.P/15), no definite opinion regarding manner and mode of death could be given whether it was homicidal or suicidal. As per FSL report (Ex.P/34) poisonous substance organophosphorus methyl parathion insecticide was found in the viscera of the deceased. Thus, it is clear that the deceased died due to consumption of above poisonous substance. However, as per the prosecution case, the appellant stated in his memorandum that he initially pressed the neck of the deceased with hands and thereafter with the help of charger cable he strangulated her. The relevant portion of memorandum of the appellant reads as under: "... दि�ाሪ��क 01.07.2018 क�सु�बहह�मक�यरቐ኏�टी�म�चली�गई, र�त कर�बाሪ 08:30 बजे�म�र�कमर�म�आय�म�आधा�घन्टी�तकर�वत�पटी�लीक� शा��कराሪ�क# ब�तब�लीकरसुमझा�य�दिकन्त�वहाሪह�म�ाሪ�शा��कराሪ�सु� इं�क�रकरत�रह�, त�म& घ�स्सु�म�अपाሪ�ह�दिकर�य�क�मक�ाሪम� 09:00 बजे� र�वत�पटी�लीक�अपाሪ�ह��थसु�गली��ब�य� 15 दिमाሪटीम�र�वत�शा��तह�गई, दि*रभी�मर�क# ाሪह�मर�ह&, सु,चकरम�ब�ईलीक�च�जे-रक�बलीत�रक� उसुक�ग�-ाሪम�घ�म�करकसुकरकर�बाሪ 05 दिमाሪटीतकपक़ቨ�रह�जेबर�वत� मरगईत�छो�डदि�य�, म& र�वत�क�मराሪ�क�पहली�क2प�क�पቐኋ�म��ाሪ�आत्म हत्य�कराሪ�क# तथ�र�वत�क# हत्य�कराሪ�क# ब�तलिलीखा�थ�. र�वत�क�मराሪ� क�ब��लिलीखा�थ�. र�वत�पटी�लीक�मराሪ�क�ब��घरम�लीग�दिबजेली�क�त�र क�आत्महत्य�कराሪ�क�लिलीएपकड�त�एम.सु�.व्ह�. दिगरजे�ाሪ�सु�दिबजेली� ग�लीह�गई, र�वत�क�म�ब�ईलीसु�उसुक�ममर�भी�ईदिबर�न पटी�लीक�म�ब�ईली ाሪ�बर 9827115944 म�दि�ाሪ��क 02.07.18 क�सु�बह 05:00 बजे�अ�ቇኔ�जे�म�

¶78

12 / 14

¶79

म&सु�जेदिकय�दिक 'आपक# बहाሪर�वत�पटी�लीक�म��ाሪ�ब�कक�प�छो�सुज्जे�त क�यह��म�रदि�य�ह<=, म�व�प�लिलीसुक�ली�करचली�जे�ाሪ�लिलीखाकरदिकय�थ�।"

¶80

Pursuant to the above memorandum, one charger cable and one note book were seized by the police vide Ex.P/6. However, seizure of the above articles loses its significance in view of the specific and unrebutted medical and forensic evidence which confirms death of Revti Patel due to consumption of organophosphorus methyl parathion insecticide. The autopsy surgeon (PW-9) admits in cross-examination that during postmortem he did not notice any internal or external injury on the neck of the deceased and also did not notice any symptom of strangulation on the body of the deceased. Even the prosecution has failed to prove the nature of death of the deceased whether it was homicidal or suicidal.

¶81

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Satish Nirankari Vs. State of Rajasthan; (2017) 8 SCC 497 held in paras 38 and 39 of its judgment as under:-

¶82

“38. …… The prosecution failed to prove that the cause of death was homicidal. Dr. S.K. Pathak (P.W.-3) did not say that death was homicidal in nature. Post-mortem report (Ext.P-4) also does not say that it was homicidal.

¶83

This aspect is not even dealt with by the High Court. Further, the alleged weapon i.e. cable wire was not sent to CFSL and to any scientific laboratory to confirm fingerprints of the appellant. All the aforesaid factors amply demonstrate that the prosecution has not been able to bring

¶84

13 / 14

¶85

out and prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. There are lurking doubts in the story of the prosecution and many missing links which are pointed out above.”

¶86

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and quality of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the oral evidence being totally inconsistent and contrary to the medical and forensic evidence; failure of the prosecution to prove the fact of appellant being last seen with the deceased and nature of death of the deceased, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove complicity of the appellant in the crime in question. The findings recorded by learned trial Court run contrary to the material available on record. Being so, the appellant is held entitled to be acquitted of the charge under Section 302 of IPC.

¶87

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is hereby set aside and consequently, the appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 302 of IPC. The appellant is reported to be in jail, therefore, he be set free forthwith if not required in connection with any other offence.

¶88

27. Keeping in view the provisions of Section 437-A of CrPC, the appellant is directed to furnish a personal bond in terms of form No.45 prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure for a sum of Rs.25,000/with one reliable surety in the like amount before the Court concerned

¶89

14 / 14

¶90

which shall be effective for a period of six months alongwith an undertaking that in the event of filing of special leave petition against the instant judgment or for grant of leave, the aforesaid appellant on receipt of notice thereon shall appear before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶91

The record of the trial Court along with copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action.

¶92

Sd/ Sd/ (Rajani Dubey) (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Judge

¶93

Digitally MOHD signed by AKHTAR MOHD KHAN AKHTAR KHAN Khan

Ghanshyam Verma @ Raja Verma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Verma @ Raja Verma 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

Smt. Nagma Verma Vs Balkrishna Verma

Ankit Kumar Choubey Vs Smt. Ambalika

Vyas Ram Chandravanshi Vs Smt. Sharda Chandravanshi

Smt. Laxmi Vaishnav Vs Smt. Amrika Bai Ajagalay

Kalyan Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Ramindar Kaur Dutta Vs Ashish Bhutada