Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Rajendra Badamikar, J.
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Appellant
Vs.
RAHUL DILIP PAWAR – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2707 of 2013
Decided On : 14-09-2021
acquittal - Criminal Appeal - Sections 420, 465, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC - The court discussed the legal provisions of Sections 420, 465, and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish fraudulent and dishonest intention for Section 420, mental process of instigating for Section 306, and creation of a false document with the intention to cause damage for Section 465. The court highlighted the lack of evidence to prove these elements and the inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Amit, was induced to pay Rs.2,00,000 under the guise of getting employment in Mercantile Navy. He committed suicide, alleging that the accused had abetted in his suicide. The State appealed against the judgment of acquittal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. It highlighted inconsistencies in the evidence, lack of proof for fraudulent and dishonest intention, and the absence of evidence to show that the accused met the deceased prior to his death. The judgment of acquittal was upheld.
Issues: The key issues included establishing fraudulent and dishonest intention for Section 420, proving the mental process of instigating for Section 306, and demonstrating the creation of a false document with the intention to cause damage for Section 465. The court also considered the inconsistencies in the evidence and the lack of proof for the alleged transactions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of establishing the essential elements of the offenses under Sections 420, 465, and 306 of the IPC. It highlighted the need for clear and consistent evidence to prove the accused's guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was dismissed, upholding the judgment of acquittal.
JUDGMENT :
Rajendra Badamikar, J.
1. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 29.11.2012 passed by the Fast Track Court-IV, Belagavi in S.C.No. 163/2012 and prayed for setting aside the judgment of acquittal and sought for convicting the accused/respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred with the original ranks occupied by them before the trial court.
3. Brief facts leading to the case are that, one Shankar G.Chavan is an agriculturist and resident of Chikalwal village in Chikodi Taluka. He has two sons by name Amit and Shivadatt. Shivadatt is married and is working in Military. Complainant is living with his family members and he is financially sound. The son of complainant, i.e., deceased Amit passed B.A. 2nd year and he had no interest to do agriculture. As such, he intended to go for job and was in search of a job. It is alleged that accused No. 1 induced him to pay Rs.2,00,000/- so that they would provide him an employment in Mercantile Navy and taken him to Mumbai, Chennai and also sent him one month training in Kolkata. But however, the deceased could not get any job and accused failed to repay the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- also.
4. It is alleged that on 02.06.2011 at 9.00 a.m. complainant's son committed suicide in the cattle shed situated in R.S.No. 25/2 belonging to the complainant by hanging himself to the roof and left a suicide note disclosing that accused have abetted in committing the suicide. The complainant lodged a written complaint in this regard in Basaveshwar Chowk police station, Nippani on 02.06.2011 at about 12.00 p.m. The investigating officer registered it in crime No. 37/2011 against accused No. 1/respondent and absconding accused No. 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 420, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC by issuing FIR. Subsequently, he visited the spot and inquest was done on the dead body. He sent the dead body for postmortem and later he recorded the statement of the witnesses and also collected material documents and found that accused have committed the offences punishable under Section 465, 420, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC and submitted charge sheet. After submission of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and committed the matter to the sessions court. Then this matter came to be placed before the FTC-IV, Belagavi and the learned Sessions Judge secured the presence of the accused. The accusation framed was read over and explained to the accused and he pleaded not guilty. Then to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined in all 12 witnesses and also placed reliance on 38 documents and 4 material objects. After conclusion of the evidence of the prosecution, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is recorded to enable the accused to explain incriminating evidence appearing against him in the case of the prosecution. The case of the accused is of total denial. However, he got examined himself as D.W.1 and he also placed reliance on Exs.D1 to D7.
5. After hearing the arguments and after perusing the material evidence placed on record, the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the accused/respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 420, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Being aggrieved by this judgment of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C.
6. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned High Court Government Pleader for the appellant/State and learned counsel for the respondent/accused. Perused the trial court records.
7. Learned HCGP would contend that the judgment of the trial court is not maintainable on facts and the same is passed without considering the material evidence on record. That the trial court has failed to appreciate the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3, 4 and 6 who have been cheated by the accused. He would contend that the trial court has
AI
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the essential elements of the offenses under Sections 420, 465, and 306 of the IPC beyond all reaso....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for a conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be evidence of instigation or intentional aid by the accused to drive ....
To sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide, there must be clear evidence of instigation or active involvement by the accused, which was not established in this case.
To convict under Section 306 IPC, clear, proximate acts of instigation by the accused must be proved, lacking mere allegations of harassment.
Legal proceedings for debt recovery, in absence of specific instigation evidence, do not amount to abetment of suicide as per Section 306 IPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
