CRA No. 774 of 2004. Case: Radheshyam Kashyap Vs The State of Chhattisgarh. Chhattisgarh High Court

Case NumberCRA No. 774 of 2004
CounselFor Appellant: Neeraj Mehta, Advocate and For Respondents: S. Majid Ali, PL
JudgesPrashant Kumar Mishra and Anil Kumar Shukla, JJ.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 437A; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 302
Judgement DateFebruary 20, 2017
CourtChhattisgarh High Court


Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

  1. Appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment on being convicted under Section 302 IPC for committing murder of deceased Manas Bai, wife of PW-1 Jagdish Kashyap.

  2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that there was some dispute pertaining to partition of ancestral land between Jagdish Kashyap and his elder brother, the present appellant Radheshyam. It is also said that the oxen belonging to the deceased had soiled the cooked food in the appellant's house, on which there was quarrel between the appellant's wife and the deceased, therefore, the appellant went to the agricultural field between 9 am to 12 noon on 29.10.2003 and murdered the deceased by strangulation in the nearby agricultural field belonging to PW-6 Dauram. The merg intimation was lodged by the appellant himself at about 3 pm on the date of incident. FIR against unknown persons was also registered after merg enquiry. Before this, FIR was registered at 11:40 hours on 06.11.2003. In the absence of any clue as to who has committed the murder, the Police interrogated the appellant, PW-1 Jagdish Kashyap, husband of the deceased, and PW-6 Dauram. The appellant allegedly made extra judicial confession in presence of the villagers on 10.03.2004. The appellant also informed the Investigating Officer regarding concealment of golden ear ring of the deceased, near the agricultural field of PW-6 Dauram. Based on his memorandum statement (Ex-P-7), the golden ear ring was recovered vide Ex-P-8 on 10.03.2004.

  3. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the appellant on 07.04.2004.

  4. In course of trial, amongst other witnesses, prosecution examined PW-2 Rameshwar and PW-3 Firat Bai, the parents of the deceased, PW-5 Narottam Das, PW-6 Dauram, PW-10 Badri Singh and PW-14 Chaitram Sahu. The appellant abjured the guilt, pleaded innocence and examined one defence witness namely Raju @ Rajkumar Bhardwaj (DW-1). At the conclusion of trial, the appellant has been convicted as stated supra, for committing murder of the deceased Manas Bai.

  5. Challenging the conviction, Shri Neeraj Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that there is absolutely no evidence against the appellant so as to incriminate him in the present offence, therefore, the conviction deserves to be set aside.

  6. Per contra, Shri Majid Ali, learned State counsel, would submit that the prosecution has proved the case against the appellant by producing circumstantial evidence in the nature of extra judicial confession and presence of the appellant at the place of occurrence approximately at the same time...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT