JUDGMENT :

1. This criminal appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.11.2002 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Korba, District Korba (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.335 of 99, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for one month.

2. It is an important fact of the case is that co-accused Ramkishun, brother of Labho Ram has been died during trial. Co-accused Smt. Sahodara Bai is the first wife of appellant Labho Ram and co-accused Smt. Maina Bai is the mother of appellant Labho Ram. Under the impugned judgment, Smt. Sahodara Bai and Smt. Meena Bai were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC by the trial Court.

3. Briefly stated facts of the case, are that appellant Labho Ram was married to Smt. Sahodara Bai. Smt. Sahodara Bai had gone to her maternal home and started living there, who did not come even when called then Labho Ram married to Sita Bai (deceased) as per Chudi tradition and brought her to his village Kadamhakhar, Manikpur. After 6-7 months, Smt. Sahodara Bai (first wife of appellant) came back to her matrimonial home and started living with appellant Labho Ram. Thereafter Labho Ram started torturing and assaulting Sita Bai by saying that because Sahodara Bai has come, he will not keep her. Upon such torture, in the intervening night of 11-12.05.1999, Sita Bai committed suicide by hanging herself in her in-laws house. Then, on the information of appellant Labho Ram, Police registered the case and prepared panchnama of dead body of deceased. The dead body was sent for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. B.P. Kanwar (PW-9) and as per postmortem report (Ex.P/7), it was opined that death of Sita Bai could be suicidal. After completion of the investigation, chage-sheet was filed against the appellant.

4. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in which, he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence brought on record by the prosecution, pleaded innocence and false implication. In defence, appellant has not examined any witness.

5. After conclusion of the trial, the trial Court has appreciated the statements of Dujram (PW-1) brother of deceased, Veena Nand (PW-2) relative, Dhankunwar (PW-3) sister-in-law of deceased, Gaya Ram (PW-4) father of deceased, Samay Lal (PW -5) brother of deceased as well as Kaushal Prasad (PW-6) nephew of deceased and concluded that after return of first wife Smt. Sahodara Bai, appellant has stated Sita Bai that she was no longer needed and go away. Upon such torture, Sita Bai committed suicide by hanging herself and on the basis of which, appellant Labho Ram has been convicted and sentenced for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC, against which, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that amongst PW-1 to PW-6 relied upon by the trial Court, Samay Lal (PW-5) and Kaushal Prasad (PW-6) are hearsay witnesses, who have neither seen nor heard anything regarding torture. The remaining witnesses are close relatives of deceased and their Police statements and Court statements are contradictory to each other. He further submits that the fact has come in their evidence that first marriage of Sita Bai was solemnized with Narmada, but she did not go to her in-laws' house. Sita Ba