Partly allowed¶16

Shambhu Yadav (Deleted) v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Oct 2025CRA/89/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; CRA 89/2012; decided 16.10.2025 by Rajani Dubey, J.; S.498-A IPC conviction maintained (cruelty to wife Anita Yadav who committed suicide 23/24.08.2009); sentence reduced to period already undergone (~2 months) — 16-year-old case, appellant aged ~46, long bail without misuse; fine Rs.500/- intact; appeal abated against deceased appellant Shambhu Yadav; bonds under S.437-A Cr.P.C./S.481 BNSS; appeal partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed in part: conviction under Section 498-A IPC maintained; sentence reduced to the period already undergone; fine of Rs.500/- retained; appellant directed to furnish personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in like amount under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. (S.481 BNSS), effective six months. ¶16

Shambhu Yadav (Deleted) Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 498-A IPC recorded by the trial Court is in accordance with law (counsel did not challenge conviction; Court nevertheless scrutinised it). +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

Conviction of the appellant Vinod Yadav under Section 498-A IPC is upheld; the trial Court committed no illegality in recording it on the basis of ocular and medical evidence.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Sentence under Section 498-A IPC is reduced to the period already undergone (about 2 months), considering the incident occurred in 2009, nearly 16 years have elapsed, the appellant is now about 46 years old, and he has been on bail without misusing liberty.

¶15

Key takeaways

The fine imposed by the trial Court under Section 498-A IPC shall remain intact notwithstanding reduction of the custodial sentence.ratio¶16
The appeal stands abated qua appellant No.1 Shambhu Yadav following his death during pendency, per this Court's order dated 22.09.2025.ratio¶2

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal (CRA No. 89 of 2012) under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against judgment dated 31.12.2011 of Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, convicting the appellants under Section 498-A IPC (sentence: R.I. 3 years + fine Rs.500/-) in the suicide of Anita Yadav, wife of appellant Vinod Yadav, on the night intervening 23/24.08.2009. Appellant No.1 (Shambhu Yadav) died during pendency and the appeal stood abated qua him. Counsel challenged only the sentence. Holding (Rajani Dubey, J.): conviction under Section 498-A IPC upheld — witnesses (father Gayaprasad PW-1, uncle Gajadhar Yadav PW-2, aunt Ganeshi Yadav PW-4) and medical evidence (Dr. G.S. Jatra PW-7: death due to asphyxia by hanging; ante-mortem bluish contusion 2x2 cm on back) established harassment and cruelty; no illegality in the trial Court's finding. On sentence: incident of 2009, nearly 16 years elapsed, appellant now aged about 46, only about 2 months undergone, on bail throughout without misuse — custodial sentence reduced to period already undergone; fine left intact. Directions: bail bonds under S.437-A Cr.P.C. r/w S.481 B.N.S.S. (Rs.25,000/- personal bond with like surety, effective six months); trial Court record remitted.

2025:CGHC:51691

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 89 of 2012

¶6

1 - Shambhu Yadav (Deleted) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09-092025

¶7

2 - Vinod Yadav, S/o Shambhu Yadav, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Podi Uproda, Katghora, District - Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶8

...Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Bango, District - Korba Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Respondent(s)

¶12

For Appellant	: Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent(s) /State	: Ms. N.K. Kashyap, P.L.

¶13

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

¶14

Judgment on Board

¶15

16/10/2025

¶16

The appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.12.2011 passed by

¶17

¶18

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, Koraba (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 112/2009 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 498-A of IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

¶19

As per this Court’s order dated 22.09.2025, appellant No.1Shambhu Yadav died and therefore, the instant appeal stands abated in respect of appellant No.1- Shambhu Yadav. Thus, the instant appeal is being prosecuted on behalf of appellant No.2- Vinod Yadav.

¶20

The case, in brief, is that in the night intervening 23.08.2009 and 24.08.2009, father of the deceased lodged a written report to the effect that her daughter had come to Podi after getting married 7 years ago from Pachara, whom he had sent his son Santosh to Podi to bring her daughter in the name of Teej festival. Father-in-law Shambhu Yadav and husband Vinod Yadav did not allow the deceased to go to her parental home. On getting this information, he came and discussed with the inlaws of the deceased however, despite that she was not allowed to go, therefore, he went back home to Pachara. Thereafter, at about 8:00 a.m., Khilawan Yadav of VillagePodi informed him over the phone that the deceased was found hanging in the courtyard of the house, upon receiving the information, he suspected that the accused together killed his

¶21

¶22

daughter and hanged her. Subsequently, an FIR was registered and investigation was carried out. During investigation, it was found that on 23.08.2009, deceased accompanied by her father and uncle, appeared at the police station under the supervision of Inspector Jageshwar Prasad Shukla. She filed a report stating that her father-in-law and husband assaulted her every day. They had also beaten her on the day she came to report the case. When she complained of back pain due to an injury, she was examined at the Central Health Commission (CHC), Podi. Her report was filed vide Ex.P/10. The statement of witness Chenkumar was recorded vide Ex.P/7. Patwari Dilip Kumar prepared a map of the scene of occurrence vide Ex.P/9. Medical report was prepared. Inquest memo was prepared by an Executive Magistrate, summoning the witnesses by giving them notice vide Ex.P/5. A map of the scene of occurrence was prepared vide Ex.P/1. The body was exhumed before the Panchas and was sent for postmortem. The scene of occurrence was found to be the room of the accused Vinod and the deceased was found hanging in the Kaderi . After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the accused persons. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Korba for trial on transfer. The learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 498-A and 306/34 of IPC against the appellants, to which appellants abjured their guilt and claimed to be tried.

¶23

¶24

In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. However, he did not adduce any evidence in his defence.

¶25

Learned trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, acquitted the co-accused Teju of the charges under Sections 306 and 498-A of IPC and the appellants Shambhu Yadav and Vinod Yadav of the charge under Section 306 of IPC but convicted both of them under Section 498-A of IPC and sentenced them as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not challenging the conviction part of the impugned judgment, however, he is confining his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. He further submits that the incident took place in the year 2009, this appeal is pending since 2011 at the time of incident the appellant was aged about 30 years and as of now he is aged about 46 years; appellant has already remained in jail for near about 2 months . Therefore, considering the above facts, his undergone period may be considered to be sufficient sentence for the alleged offence.

¶27

Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the finding arrived at by the learned trial Court is based on proper

¶28

¶29

appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and, therefore, is not liable to be interfered with.

¶30

Learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

¶31

Upon perusal of record of learned trial Court that the learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 498-A and 306/34 of IPC against the appellant and other co-accused persons and after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial Court acquitted the co-accused Teju of the charges under Sections 306 and 498- A of IPC & appellants Shambhu Yadav and Vinod Yadav were acquitted of the charge under Section 306 of IPC however, learned trial Court convicted both of them under Section 498-A of IPC. During pendency of this appeal, appellant No.1- Shambhu Yadav died and therefore, the instant appeal stands abated in respect of appellant No.1- Shambhu Yadav.

¶32

It is an admitted position before the learned trial Court that the deceased Anita Yadav was wife of appellant Vinod Yadav and in the night intervening 23.08.2009 and 24.08.2009, she committed suicide.

¶33

Gayaprasad (P.W.-1) who is father of the deceased stated that the accused/appellant committed marpeet with his daughter (deceased) and also tortured her physically and mentally. He further stated that when he along with other persons went to the house of the appellant to bring his

¶34

¶35

daughter (deceased) with them then the accused chased to beat them also. Thereafter, they ran away from there and lodged report against the accused persons.

¶36

Uncle of the deceased -Gajadhar Yadav (P.W.-2) and aunt of the deceased- Smt. Ganeshi Yadav (P.W.-4) also supported the statement of Gayaprasad (P.W.-1) and stated that the appellant and his family members harassed the deceased physically and mentally.

¶37

Dr. G.S. Jatra (P.W.-7) conducted the postmortem of the deceased and gave his report vide Ex.P/4 in this regard. He opined that the cause of death is asphyxia due to hanging. He further stated that before the death of the deceased Anita Yadav, he examined her on 23.08.2009 and found that there was a bluish contusion in the back of the deceased, measuring 2 x 2 cm and there was pain in the entire back and it was felt on pressing. He prepared her medical report vide Ex.P/9.

¶38

Close scrutiny of statements of all witnesses including the medical evidence makes it prove that the appellant harassed the deceased and subjected cruelty to her. In these circumstances, trial Court has not committed any illegality in recording the conviction under Section 498-A of IPC against him. As such, the conviction of the appellant under Section 498-A of IPC is found to be in accordance with law.

¶39

So far as the sentence part of the appellant is concerned, keeping in view the facts that incident took place in the year

¶40

¶41

2009 and nearly 16 years have rolled by since then, appellant is now aged about 46 years and he remained in jail for about 2 months; the appellant is on bail since long and did not misuse the liberty so granted, hence taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served if the sentence awarded under Section 498-A of IPC to the appellant by the trial Court is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶42

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining conviction of the appellant under Section 498-A of IPC the sentence imposed thereunder by the trial Court is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by him. The fine amount imposed by the learned trial Court thereunder shall remain intact.

¶43

The appellant is reported to be on bail. Keeping in view the provisions of Section 437-A of Cr.P.C. (481 of the B.N.S.S.), the appellant is directed to forthwith furnish a personal bond in terms of Form No. 45 prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure of sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount before the Court concerned which shall be effective for a period of six months along with an undertaking that in the event of filing of Special Leave Petition against the instant judgment or for grant of leave, the aforesaid appellant on receipt of notice thereof shall appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶44

¶45

18. The trial Court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey)

JUDGE

Ruchi

RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed byRUCHI YADAV

Shambhu Yadav (Deleted) v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Yadav (Deleted) v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Kumar Baul Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bablu Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prem Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay @ Sanju Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Tarlochan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh