Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SACHIN SINGH RAJPUT
Rameshwar, S/o Samaru Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Post Bhatgaon – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellants convicted for abetment (Para 1) |
| 2. relationship and pregnancy of deceased (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. defense claims lack of evidence (Para 4) |
| 4. prosecution counters defense (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. legal position on abetment (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 6. absence of evidence for conviction (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. appeal allowed and acquittal (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
(Sachin Singh Rajput, J.)
1. The appellants in this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) have called in question the legality, correctness and judicial propriety of the judgment dated 16/12/2003 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar in Sessions Trial No. 68/2003, by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner :-
| Conviction | Sentence |
| Under Section 306 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC) | 5 Years R.I. with fine of Rs. 5000/- with default sentence of R.I. for 6 |
| Under Section 498-A of IPC | 2 Years R.I. with fine of Rs. 500/- with default sentence of R.I. for 2 months. |
| Both sentences to run concurrently and default sentence to run separately. | |
2. As per prosecution story, the appella
To convict under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or direct acts leading to suicide must be established, which was absent in this case.
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aiding that compels suicide, which was not established in this case.
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 convict under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or abetment must be established, which was not proven in this case.
Cruelty and abetment of suicide – Mere fact of commission of suicide by itself would not be sufficient for Court to raise presumption under Section 113A of Evidence Act, and to hold accused guilty of....
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or abetment is required, which was not established in this case.
The judgment emphasizes the stringent requirement of proving clear mens rea and direct act leading to suicide to establish the offense of abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, highlighting the n....
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
