{"id":109224,"date":"2010-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010"},"modified":"2018-06-03T15:00:06","modified_gmt":"2018-06-03T09:30:06","slug":"hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Chattisgarh High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR          \n\n Criminal Appeal No 291 of 2003\n\n Hansraj\n                                               ...Petitioners\n                           Versus\n State of Chhattisgarh\n                                              ...Respondents\n\n! Shri Vinod Kumar Tekam counsel for the appellant\n\n^ Shri Sandeep Yadav D y Govt Advocate for the State\n\n CORAM: Honble Shri Dhirendra Mishra &amp; Honble Shri R N Chandrakar J   \n\n Dated: 30\/07\/2010\n\n: Judgement \n\n                       J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>                    Delivered on 3072010<\/p>\n<p>  1.   This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment<\/p>\n<p>     of conviction and order of sentence dated 19-12-2002 passed<\/p>\n<p>     in Sessions Trial Case No. 257 of 2002, whereby learned<\/p>\n<p>     Fourth Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Kanker, District<\/p>\n<p>     Kanker, has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the<\/p>\n<p>     Indian  Penal  Code and sentenced him to  undergo  life<\/p>\n<p>     imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1000\/-, for committing<\/p>\n<p>     murder  of   Preetam, in default of payment of fine  to<\/p>\n<p>     undergo further R.I. of six months.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   The case of the prosecution, in brief, as projected in<br \/>\nthe impugned judgment is that  the accused appellant  was<br \/>\nhelping Ramlal  in his domestic works in village Ghotha<br \/>\nSakulpara.  The accused\/appellant was being tormented by<br \/>\nRamlal whenever he demanded money as his wages.  On 28-3-<br \/>\n2002 the appellant  in the pretext  that he is going to his<br \/>\nhouse, took the cycle and bag  and proceeded ahead.  At<br \/>\nabout 9.00 he returned back and told Ramlal that the cycle<br \/>\ngot punctured.  He left the cycle and bag and demanded money<br \/>\nfrom Budhiyarin Bai for getting puncture repaired.<br \/>\nBudhiyarin Bai wife of the Ramlal told him that she had no<br \/>\nmoney and was taking out Dhan which the appellant can  sell<br \/>\nthe same in the shop for getting punctured repaired.  After<br \/>\nrefusal of the accused,  Dhan,  Budhiyarin Bai went to<br \/>\nnearby shop for selling Dhan.  At that time, Ramlal was<br \/>\nplastering the courtyard.  Budhiyarin Bai returned to her<br \/>\nhouse at 9.30 after selling Dhan.  When she saw the accused<br \/>\ncoming from towards Bari of the courtyard running with Farsi<br \/>\nin his hand.  She went to the courtyard and saw     Ramlal<br \/>\nher husband dead smeared with blood and his head chopped<br \/>\noff.  Seeing the condition of her husband, she made outcry<br \/>\nsaying that accused killed her husband and was running.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   Information was registered as morgue intimation Ex.P\/6.<br \/>\nAfter receiving morgue intimation, police proceeded for<br \/>\ninvestigation to village Patharri and prepared inquest (Ex-<br \/>\nP\/10) over the person of the deceased in presence of<br \/>\nwitnesses.  Thereafter, the dead body was sent for autopsy<br \/>\nto Government Hospital, Mainpur, where Dr. K.C. Uram (PW\/1)<br \/>\nconducted post mortem and gave his report (Ex-P\/1).   On the<br \/>\nbasis of memorandum   of the appellant (Ex.P\/7), blood<br \/>\nstained weapon of offence broken club in two pieces was<br \/>\ntaken into possession vide Ex.P\/8.  Station House Officer<br \/>\nprepared site map (Ex.P\/14) and spot map  (Ex.P\/15) was got<br \/>\nprepared   by  Patwari Shri Mugal Singh Nagesh   (PW\/8).<br \/>\nBlood stained club was forwarded to Dr. K.C. Uram (PW\/1) for<br \/>\nexamination and the Doctor opined that injuries found on the<br \/>\nbody of Meena Bai could be caused by bamboo stick and he<br \/>\nadvised the article to be sent for chemical analysis for<br \/>\nconfirmation of presence of blood (Ex.P\/5).\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   After completing the investigation, charge sheet was<br \/>\nfiled against the appellant in the Court of Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate First Class, Gariyaband, who in turn committed<br \/>\nthe case to the Court of Sessions Judge, Raipur and the same<br \/>\nwas received on transfer for trial by the learned Additional<br \/>\nSessions Judge, who framed charge under Section 302 of the<br \/>\nIndian Penal Code against the appellant who abjured his<br \/>\nguilt.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   Prosecution  in order to establish the charges  against<\/p>\n<p>     the  appellant examined 9 witnesses in all.  Thereafter<\/p>\n<p>     the  statement  of  the   accused  was  recorded  under<\/p>\n<p>     Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which<\/p>\n<p>     he  denied the circumstances appearing against  him  in<\/p>\n<p>     the  prosecution case and pleaded innocence  and  false<\/p>\n<p>     implication.   He also pleaded that his  wife  consumed<\/p>\n<p>     excessive liquor and died due to fall.  However, he did<\/p>\n<p>     not examine any witness in defence.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   The   trial  Court  after  hearing  counsel   for   the<\/p>\n<p>     respective   parties,  convicted  and   sentenced   the<\/p>\n<p>     appellant  as  mentioned  in  paragraph  one   of   the<\/p>\n<p>     judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p> 7.  Homicidal  death of deceased  Meena Bai  has  not  been<\/p>\n<p>     seriously disputed.  However, from the evidence of  Dr.<\/p>\n<p>     K.C.  Uram  (PW\/1), who conducted postmortem and proved <\/p>\n<p>     the  report  (Ex.P\/1) in which he found  the  following<\/p>\n<p>     injuries on the person of the deceased and opined  that<\/p>\n<p>     the cause of death  was  cardio- respiratory arrest due<\/p>\n<p>     to  hypovolumia   shock and homicidal in nature and has<\/p>\n<p>     further  described that the mode of death was  multiple<\/p>\n<p>     trauma   on  the  body leads to abnormal collection  of<\/p>\n<p>     blood  over  traumatical part which led to  hypovolumia<\/p>\n<p>     of blood and  further described  that the time of death<\/p>\n<p>     was 24 &#8211; 72 hours before the postmortem,  we are of the<\/p>\n<p>     opinion  that the trial Court has rightly rejected  the<\/p>\n<p>     defence  of  the appellant and held that  the  deceased<\/p>\n<p>     died homicidal death.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n                       I N J U R I E S\n\n         i)     On right lower part of chest over 9\n                -  12th rib area abrasion line 4 -5\n                cm long 2 in number, red colour.\n\n         ii)    On  the  back side of body -  right\n                scapulla    1 x 1 cm.\n\n         iii    Black  colour contusion  and  below\n         )      inf.  angle area  of right scuppula\n                6  -7 cm long  and 1 + to 2 cm with\n                contusion two in number.\n\n         iv)    Neck: left side of neck- horizontal\n                contusion 10-12 cm long 1 + to 2 cm\n                width  red colour.\n\n         v)     Left  shoulder- contusion - 3  x  4\n                cm. red colour.\n\n         vi)    Buttock  - right buttock  -   whole\n                buttock   reddish   colour,   10-12\n                contusions   horizontal,   oblique,\n                vertical each contusion - 8 m-10 cm\n                long  1 + to 2 cm width.\n\n         vii    Buttock  - 8-12 contusions, each  8-\n         )      10 cm long width 1 + to 2 cm.\n\n         vii    Scapulla  -  two  contusions,  each\n         i)     contusion  7-8 cm long  1 + to 2 cm\n                width.\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>8.    Shri  R.S.  Marhas, learned counsel for the  appellant<\/p>\n<p>  submits that there is no eye-witness to the incident.  The<\/p>\n<p>  conviction  of  the  appellant is based on  circumstantial<\/p>\n<p>  evidence.  However, the circumstances relied upon  by  the<\/p>\n<p>  prosecution have not been independently established during<\/p>\n<p>  investigation.  The trial Court has also not considered the<\/p>\n<p>  fact  that the appellant did not flee away from his  house<\/p>\n<p>  after the incident.  Had he been responsible for murder of<\/p>\n<p>  his wife, he could have definitely absconded.  The time of<\/p>\n<p>  the incident is also not certain as the Doctor has given the<\/p>\n<p>  time  of  death  of the deceased 24 to 72 hours  from  the<\/p>\n<p>  postmortem.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.    On  the  other  hand,  Shri G.D.  Waswani,  Government<\/p>\n<p>  Advocate,  appearing on behalf of the State supported  the<\/p>\n<p>  impugned judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  We have heard learned counsel for the parties and<br \/>\nperused the record of the trial court  as also the impugned<br \/>\njudgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.   Conviction  is based on circumstantial  evidence.  The<\/p>\n<p>  circumstances relied upon by the trial Court are as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       O    The appellant and the deceased resided together in the<br \/>\n          same house where Meena Bai was murdered.  Appellant&#8217;s sister-<br \/>\n          in-law Kunti Bai (PW\/4) who resides in the house adjacent to<br \/>\n          the house of the appellant over heard the appellant and the<br \/>\n          deceased quarrelling with each other and the screams of the<br \/>\n          deceased to save her life.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       O    The appellant did not inform anyone in the village<br \/>\n          about the death of his wife when he was asked by Budhram<br \/>\n          (PW\/3) as to how Meena Bai died.  He kept quite  and lastly<br \/>\n          the appellant took defence that Meena Bai consumed excessive<br \/>\n          liquor and she died due to fall under intoxication which has<br \/>\n          been found to be false.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       O    The weapon of offence Bamboo stick was recovered  on<br \/>\n          the basis of disclosure statement of the appellant and<br \/>\n          Doctor opined that the injuries present over the dead body<br \/>\n          of Meena Bai could be caused by Bamboo stick.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>12.   The  trial Court relying upon the evidence of  Budhram<\/p>\n<p>  (PW\/3) and Kunti Bai (PW\/4) has held that  both Meena Bai,<\/p>\n<p>  wife of the appellant  and the appellant  resided together<\/p>\n<p>  in the same house where the incident occurred.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.   PW\/3 Budhram has deposed that the appellant is his<br \/>\nnephew whereas deceased is his daughter-in-law.  After death<br \/>\nof Meena Bai, he went to Police Station and reported the<br \/>\nmatter about the death of the deceased.  He also stated that<br \/>\nhe went and saw the dead body of the deceased, however, he<br \/>\ndid not inspect closely  and  did not see any injury on her<br \/>\nperson.  At the time of inquest  he noticed injuries over<br \/>\nthe person of Meena Bai .   In his cross examination he<br \/>\nadmitted that Meena Bai used to consume excessive liquor and<br \/>\nshe died because of that.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.  PW.4 &#8211; Kunti Bai, has deposed that the appellant is her<br \/>\nbrother-in-law whereas Meena  Bai, is wife of the appellant.<br \/>\nOn Sunday at 10 &#8211; 11 p.m., she heard appellant and the<br \/>\ndeceased quarreling.  When she went out of her house, she<br \/>\nheard that  Meena Bai was shouting to save her.  After her<br \/>\ndeath she went to her and found injuries on her face.  Meena<br \/>\nBai and the appellant quarreled with each other  on Sunday<br \/>\nand because of beating she died.  In cross-examination she<br \/>\nhas stated that her house is in front of the appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nhouse.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.  From perusal of the above evidence, it is established<br \/>\nthat the appellant and the deceased were husband and wife<br \/>\nand they resided together in the same house where the<br \/>\nincident took place.  In the intervening night of Sunday and<br \/>\nMonday, there was quarrel between the deceased and the<br \/>\nappellant and the deceased was shouting for help which was<br \/>\nover heard by Kunti Bai (PW\/4). Report of the incident was<br \/>\nlodged by Budhram (PW\/3) in Police Station, Mainpur on 27-8-<br \/>\n2002. The deceased died in the house of the appellant,<br \/>\nhowever, he did not disclose the fact of her death either to<br \/>\nthe villagers or to the Police and he kept quite till<br \/>\ninvestigation  commenced after the report  by  Budhram<br \/>\n(PW\/3).  The appellant has taken the defence by way of cross-<br \/>\nexamining the prosecution witnesses as also in his statement<br \/>\nunder Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that the<br \/>\ndeceased died due to fall as she had consumed excessive<br \/>\nliquor. The above defence also establishes the presence of<br \/>\nthe appellant in his house when Meena Bai died and the<br \/>\nexplanation offered by the appellant regarding death of his<br \/>\nwife has been falsified by the evidence of Dr. K.C. Uram<br \/>\n(PW\/1), who has categorically opined that the injuries<br \/>\npresent over dead body could not be caused by fall on the<br \/>\nground.  That apart, the disclosure statement of the<br \/>\nappellant regarding the recovery of weapon of offence &#8211;<br \/>\nBamboo stick and the Dr. K.C. Uram (PW\/1) who opined that<br \/>\nthe injuries present over the dead body could be caused by<br \/>\nbamboo stick and considering over all evidence available on<br \/>\nrecord, we are of the opinion that the prosecution has been<br \/>\nable to establish the charge against the appellant beyond<br \/>\nreasonable doubt and the circumstances relied upon by the<br \/>\nprosecution in the present case  do not call for any<br \/>\ninterference by this court and  we find no substance in this<br \/>\nappeal\n<\/p>\n<p>16.  In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby<br \/>\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                           J U D G E<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Chattisgarh High Court Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No 291 of 2003 Hansraj &#8230;Petitioners Versus State of Chhattisgarh &#8230;Respondents ! Shri Vinod Kumar Tekam counsel for the appellant ^ Shri Sandeep Yadav D y Govt Advocate for the State CORAM: Honble Shri Dhirendra [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-109224","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chattisgarh-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1649,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Chattisgarh High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010"},"wordCount":1649,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Chattisgarh High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010","name":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-03T09:30:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hansraj-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hansraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 July, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109224","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=109224"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109224\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109224"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109224"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109224"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}