IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Inder Singh Uboweja, J.
Dilip Kumar – Appellant
Vs.
State of M.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1248 of 1998
Decided On : 11-09-2015
Indian Penal Code - Sections 306 & 498A - Judgment of conviction – Appeal against conviction - Demand of dowry - In course of trial prosecution to bring home charges examined as many as twelve witnesses to support its case accused person in his statement recorded under Section 313 of Code, denied his involvement in the occurrence and pleaded innocence and false implication in crime in question - After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, on appreciation of evidence brought on record came to hold that the prosecution had been able to establish the charges against the accused and on that basis convicted and imposed sentence as has been stated herein-before. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the accused/appellant has preferred the instant appeal – Held, On reading of the aforesaid Sections together, in view of the statements made by the witnesses, I do not find any fact which will constitute an offence under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC, so as to hold the accused guilty under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC. It is important to mention here that nothing has come on record to prove the abetment for committing suicide under Section 306 of the IPC against this accused - Here in the instant case, there is no legal evidence which could be made basis for retaining the finding with respect to the alleged cruelty of the accused with the deceased, so as to connect the accused with the commission of offence under Section 498-A of IPC - Further, the statements of the witnesses are not admissible in evidence for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC as they are hearsay witnesses - Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and on minute scrutiny of the entire evidence, it is clear that prosecution has failed to prove the fact that appellant treated the deceased with cruelty in connection with demand dowry, as a result of which she committed suicide and it is also not proved that appellant had abetted the deceased for committing suicide - Conviction and sentence imposed on him by the trial Court is hereby set aside. He is acquitted of the charges - It is stated that the appellant is on bail. His bail bond shall continue for further period of 6 months as per requirement of Section 437A of the Code - Appeal Allowed
Inder Singh Uboweja, J.
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.05.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge, NDPS), Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 342 of 1997, whereby and whereunder the trial Court after holding the appellant guilty for commission of offence, convicted him under Sections 306 & 498A of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 6 years & to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo additional S.I. for 6 months and to undergo R.I. for 2 years & to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo additional S.I. for 3 months respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being an iota of evidence, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality.
2. As per case of prosecution, marriage of deceased - Beena with appellant was solemnized in the year 1992. On the fateful day i.e. 20.05.1997, at about 9.00 to 10.00 a.m., deceased was found hanging from the ceiling fan in the house of appellant, situated at Tatiband. It is the story of the prosecution that she committed suicide within seven years of her marriage as a result of abetment caused by her husband. It is also alleged that soon after her marriage, she was being treated with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry.
3. Hari Prasad (PW-1), cousin of the appellant, went to police station, Amanaka and informed the police about the incident. Investigating Officer reached the place of occurrence and after summoning the witnesses vide Ex. P-3, inquest over the dead body of the deceased was prepared vide Ex. P-4. Dead body of deceased Beena was sent for autopsy to the Medical College Hospital, Raipur vide Ex. P-5, where Dr. Ullas Gonade (PW-10), conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased vide Ex. P-12 and found following injuries and symptoms:-
(i) A ligature mark 2¼" breadth present around neck. Circular diameter is 14" the distance from right mastoid is 2" from left mastoid is 1" from chin 2¾". Mark is glistering dark, directed upward & laterally towards left side.
(ii) Bubble of saliva is present from right angle of mouth. Cyanosis of nail is present.
(iii) Tongue protruded out, mouth open, eyes open, both foot extend and right leg fold at knee.
(iv) A single knot present on left side of neck on lateral side below left mastoid ligature used is blue colour duppatta.
(v) No external injury present over body.
(vi) On neck dissection, white tissue seen beneath the ligature mark.
Cause of death was asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging and it is suicidal in nature.
4. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code'). On the basis of statements & autopsy report (Ex. P-12), First Information Report (Ex. P-13) was registered by Investigating Officer A.K. Pandey (PW-11) against the accused/appellant under Sections 306 & 498A of the IPC.
5. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, who in turn committed the case to the Court of Sessions, from where learned Additional Sessions Judge received the case on transfer for trial.
6. In course of trial, the prosecution to bring home the charges, examined as many as twelve witnesses to support its case. The accused person in his statement recorded under Section 313 of Code, denied his involvement in the occurrence and pleaded innocence and false implication in crime in question.
7. After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, on appreciation of evidence brought on record came to hold that the prosecution had been able to establish the charges against the accused and on that basis convicted and imposed sentence as has been stated herein-before. Being aggrieved by th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.