State filed an acquittal appeal challenging the trial court's order acquitting the accused of abetment to suicide. The High Court held that the trial court's decision was based on a plausible view of evidence, as the prosecution failed to prove instigation, and dismissed the appeal.)
The acquittal appeal filed by the State is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 / 6
Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2024.10.03 17:12:43 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NAFR
ACQA No. 855 of 2024
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, C.G.
... Petitioner
Versus
1 - Bhavmeshwar @ Ram S/o Ghasiram Verma Aged About 22 Years R/o Naya Acholi, Dongargarh, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, C.G.
... Respondent
For Petitioner : Shri Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Order on Board
24.09.2024
1. The State has filed the present Acquittal Appeal against the impugned judgement dated 30-09-2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, in Sessions Case No.04/2018, whereby the learned trial court has acquitted the respondent/accused from the charge under Section 306 of I.P.C.
2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the respondent and deceased Devki Bai was solemnized in the month of February 2017. She was residing at her matrimonial house where she has committed suicide on 20-09-2017 by hanging herself in a ceiling fan with the help of her Saree. Merg was intimated by the present respondent to the police and then Merg intimation was recorded. After preparing the inquest, the dead body was sent for its post-mortem to the Community Health Centre, Dongargarh, where a team of two Doctors Dr. Hemant
2 / 6
Upadhyay (P.W.7) and Dr. Ananya Shrivastava, conducted the postmortem of dead body and opined that cause of death is Asphyxia and suicidal in nature. No injuries were found on the body of the deceased.
3. The F.I.R. was registered on 20-09-2017 for the offence under Section 306 of I.P.C., and during investigation, school register with respect to date of birth of the deceased was seized. From the room of the deceased, a letter was seized, which was allegedly written by the deceased which was sent to the State Examiner of Disputed Document, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Statement of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. were recorded and after usual investigation charge sheet has been filed against the respondent for the offence under Section 306 of I.P.C.
4. The learned trial court has framed the charge under Section 306 of I.P.C. The respondents/accused abjured the guilt. To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses in its favour.
5. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has not found sufficient evidence for conviction of the respondent/accused and acquitted him from the charged offences vide impugned judgment and order dated 30-09-2019. Hence, present Acquittal Appeal has been filed by the State.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant/State would submit that the learned trial Court has erred in acquitting the respondent from the offence charged by discarding the evidence of the family members and her parents without there being any strong reason to discard the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Learned State counsel further submitted that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence of Sunil
3 / 6
Verma (PW- 8), who is the brother of the deceased. He stated that the deceased informed him that her husband (respondent) is having an extramarital affair with another lady, and he used to beat her. She disclosed the incident of M arpeet , after some time of Raksha Bandhan. The police have seized a letter from her dressing table in which it has been written that her life is spoiled because of you. The learned trial court has acquitted the respondent/accused on surmises and conjectures and has not considered the provisions of Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act 1872. He would also submit that there is sufficient evidence on record with respect to instigating her to commit suicide and abatement and the prosecution has proved the guilt of the respondent/accused, but the learned trial court has acquitted him by recording a finding which is perverse to the record and therefore, the acquittal appeal may be admitted.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/accused supported the impugned judgement and has submitted that the parents of the deceased have not supported the prosecution’s case and the brother’s evidence is also not sufficient to draw a presumption that the deceased was subjected to cruelty before her death. There is no evidence of any abatement or instigation. The letter which is seized from the dressing table of the deceased is also not proved to be in the handwriting of the deceased. Therefore, the judgement of acquittal is justified and based on proper appreciation of evidence and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
8. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record of the case including the impugned judgment of acquittal.
4 / 6
9. Learned trial court after considering the case in detail came into conclusion that there is no sufficient evidence of instigation or abatement to the deceased to commit suicide. The mother of the deceased Fuleshwari (P.W. 6) and father of the deceased Narottam (P.W. 12) have turned hostile and have not stated anything against the respondent/accused. Rather, they both have stated that the deceased was living happily with her husband in her matrimonial house. She has not disclosed about any incident of her matrimonial house. P.W. 8, Sunil Verma, though in his chief examination have stated that his sister had disclosed him about extramarital affair of the respondent/accused and he used to commit marpeet with her, but in cross-examination, he admitted that he disclosed the said incident in his police statement Ex.D-1 and if it not there, he could not tell the reason. The learned trial court further considered that letter seized from the dressing table of the deceased is not proved by the prosecution that it was written in the handwriting of the deceased. It was also held that the said writing of the letter has not been identified by her parents that it was handwriting of their daughter. From the contents of the letter also there does not appear any ingredients of abatement or instigation to commit suicide. Therefore, considering the entire evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned trial court has acquitted the respondent/ accused.
10. In this case, on the basis of rebuttable evidence, the prosecution has failed to prove that the respondent/accused has committed the offence as alleged. Therefore, there is lacking of cogent and clinching evidence in the case with respect to abatement and instigation. The acquittal of
5 / 6
the respondent/accused is neither perverse nor contrary to the evidence available on record.
11. Taking into consideration the findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, I do not find any reason to admit the acquittal appeal.
12. Applying the law governing the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Kistoora Ram, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 984 , has held as
under:-
13. In Jafarudheen and Others Vs. State of Kerala, 2022 (8) SCC 440 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the scope of interference in appeal against acquittal in judgement at para 25, which reads as under:-
6 / 6
be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters.”
14. Further, in case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Shyam Bihari & Others, 2023 (8) SCC 197 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in para 27 of its judgment that :-
15. After considering the material available on record as well as the elaborate judgment passed by the learned trial court and being very much conscious of the existing legal position as held in case of Kistoora Ram, Jafarudheen and Shyam Bihari (Supra) that in an appeal against acquittal if two views are possible on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution and the trial court taking one view favoured the accused, reversion of the findings of acquittal by the appellate court taking the other possible view into consideration, is not permissible in law. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the judgment impugned acquitting the accused/respondent is just and proper and does not call for any interference.
16. For the foregoing reasons, the acquittal appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge
inder
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the acquittal of the accused in the murder case by the trial court should be set aside in the acquisition appeal filed by the State.
Whether sufficient evidence was placed on record to prove instigation or abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Rajasthan Vs. Kistoora RamExplained¶35
State of Rajasthan Vs. Kistoora Ram, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 984 · Who else cites this
Jafarudheen and Others Vs. State of KeralaExplained¶37
Jafarudheen and Others Vs. State of Kerala, 2022 (8) SCC 440 · Who else cites this
Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Shyam Bihari & OthersExplained¶40
Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Shyam Bihari & Others, 2023 (8) SCC 197 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh
Bhavmeshwar @ Ram
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
