The High Court of Chhattisgarh has affirmed the life imprisonment of Kusumlal Sao for the murder of Saurabh Panda, observing that a combination of ocular, medical, electronic, and circumstantial evidence established the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal noted that minor contradictions or the hostility of certain witnesses do not weaken a prosecution case supported by a coherent chain of evidence.
Background
The case involves the death of Saurabh Panda, whose body was discovered on the morning of February 9, 2019, in an agricultural field in Village Sanda. The prosecution alleged that on the night of February 7, 2019, an altercation occurred between the appellant and the deceased at the appellant’s residence. Following the dispute, the appellant allegedly assaulted the deceased with an iron die and a screwdriver, transported him on a motorcycle to a secluded field, and abandoned the body to conceal the crime.
During the investigation, police recovered blood-stained soil, a blood-stained shirt belonging to the appellant, and the weapons of offense (an iron die and screwdriver) from the roof of the appellant’s house. On March 30, 2024, the Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, convicted Kusumlal Sao under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC.
Arguments of the Parties
Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, argued that the trial court’s judgment was based on “conjectures and surmises.” He contended that two purported eye-witnesses (PW-9 and PW-11) turned hostile, claiming the deceased never visited the appellant’s house. He further argued that the initial recovery of the body alongside a motorcycle suggested an accident rather than homicide. Mr. Siddiqui also challenged the recovery of weapons, noting that independent seizure witnesses did not support the prosecution’s version.
Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate for the State, submitted that the “testimony of hostile witnesses is not to be rejected in toto.” He argued that the medical evidence, coupled with WhatsApp messages indicating a prior quarrel and the “last seen” circumstance, formed a complete chain of events excluding any hypothesis of innocence.
Court’s Analysis
The Court systematically analyzed the evidence to determine if the trial court’s findings were perverse.
1. Homicidal Death and Medical Evidence: The Court relied on the testimony of Dr. Sanjay Patel (PW-25), who found a fracture of the left parietal bone and exposure of brain material. The Bench observed that such injuries were inconsistent with a simple fall from a motorcycle:
“Considering the nature of injuries… it appears highly improbable that the deceased would ride a motorcycle into the middle of the field and fall down accidentally.”
2. Weight of Electronic Records: The Court placed significant reliance on WhatsApp messages retrieved from the mobile of witness Shakrajit Patel (PW-6), supported by a certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act. These records showed a quarrel between the parties and established that the appellant took the deceased away on a motorcycle.
3. Hostility of Witnesses: Addressing the appellant’s primary defense regarding hostile witnesses, the Court held:
“Minor contradictions in the testimony of witnesses or the hostility of some witnesses would not weaken the prosecution case and would not constitute a ground for acquittal.”
The Court further noted that the appellant had unexplained injuries on his person (abrasions on fingers and head) and his conduct in abandoning the body in an isolated field pointed to an attempt to screen himself from legal punishment.
Decision
The High Court held that the prosecution successfully proved the “homicidal death,” the “quarrel,” the “last seen” circumstance, and the “recovery of weapons.” Finding no illegality or perversity in the trial court’s judgment, the Bench dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and life sentence under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. The appellant, in custody since February 2019, was directed to serve out his sentence.
Case Details
- Case Title: Kusumlal Sao vs. State of Chhattisgarh
- Case Number: CRA No. 1482 of 2024
- Bench: Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
- Date: March 13, 2026
