April 24, 2026 — The High Court of Chhattisgarh has upheld the conviction and life sentences of two men in a brutal triple murder case arising from a family land dispute in Mahasamund district, ruling that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
In a detailed judgment, a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed the criminal appeal filed by Parasram Gayakwad and his son Brijsen Gayakwad, affirming the trial court’s verdict delivered in June 2025.
The case dates back to September 11, 2020, when the accused allegedly stormed into the house of their relatives in the early hours of the morning amid a long-running land dispute. According to the prosecution, they first threw chilli powder into the victims’ eyes before launching a deadly assault using daggers. Three family members Jagriti, Tina, and Manish Gaikwad were killed on the spot, while four others sustained serious injuries.
The trial court had convicted the accused under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 302 (murder), Section 307 (attempt to murder), and Section 459 (house trespass causing grievous hurt), awarding life imprisonment along with additional sentences for other offences.
Before the High Court, the defence argued that the incident was not premeditated and occurred in the heat of a dispute, contending that the offence should be reduced to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It also questioned the reliability of witness testimonies and the absence of a clear motive to kill.
The State, however, maintained that the attack was deliberate and brutal, pointing to consistent eyewitness accounts, medical evidence, and forensic findings linking the accused to the crime.
After examining the evidence, the High Court found that the nature of injuries including fatal wounds to the neck severing vital arteries clearly established homicidal deaths. The Bench also relied on eyewitness testimonies from injured family members, noting that their presence at the scene was natural and their accounts remained consistent.
Rejecting the defence’s argument of false implication due to a property dispute, the Court observed that no evidence had been produced to support such claims. It further held that the recovery of bloodstained weapons and corroborative medical reports firmly established the accused’s involvement.
The Court concluded that the manner of attack, the choice of weapons, and the targeting of multiple victims demonstrated clear intent to kill. It ruled that the convictions for murder and attempted murder were justified and required no interference.
Dismissing the appeal, the Bench directed that the accused, who are already in custody, continue to serve their sentences. It also informed them of their right to approach the Supreme Court.
In a notable observation, the Court reiterated that testimony from related or injured witnesses cannot be dismissed merely due to their relationship with the victims, emphasizing that credibility must be assessed on consistency and reliability.
Case Title : Parasram Gayakwad and Another vs State of Chhattisgarh (CRA No. 1978 of 2025)