IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
Nilesh Raniwal S/o Shri Suraj Raniwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the incident. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's analysis of evidence. (Para 6 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 28 , 29) |
| 3. arguments by the appellant's counsel. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. admissibility and reliability of dying declarations. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. conclusion affirming the trial court's judgment. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
ORDER :
1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional/Upper Sessions Judge Dongargarh District Rajnandgao (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 12/2022, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:
| Conviction | Sentence |
| Section 306 of IPC | R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine, 06 months S.I. |
| Section 506 of IPC | R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, 01 month S.I. |
2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 01.02.2022 at about 12:30 PM, Kumari Shweta Sahu started vomiting at her residence. Upon being questioned by her family members, she disclosed that a person named Nilesh Raniwal had been editing
Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Amlendu Pal @ Jhantu v. State of West Bengal
Arjun Panditrao Khutkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal & Ors.
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra
Purshottam Chopra and another v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
The court affirmed conviction for abetment of suicide, emphasizing that clear evidence linking the accused's conduct to the victim's suicide is essential under Section 306 IPC.
Murder – Non-examination of Doctor who conducted autopsy on dead body of deceased and who prepared post-mortem report is not fatal to case of prosecution.
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
A dying declaration, while crucial, cannot solely support a conviction for abetment of suicide or cruelty without corroborative evidence and clear proof of intent.
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.