Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY KUMAR JAISWAL
State Of Chhattisgarh – Appellant
Versus
Rohit Baghel Alias Kheju Baghel, S/o Late Banmali Baghel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.
1 This appeal is preferred under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment dated 26.03.2019 passed in Sessions Trial No. 31/2013 by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District - Durg (C.G.), whereby the respondent has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, in connection with Crime No. 226/2012 registered at Police Station – Kumhari, District – Durg (C.G.).
2 The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the accused, Rohit Baghel, was married to Jyoti Baghel in 2011. On April 21, 2012, Jyoti Baghel was found hanging in her in-laws' residence at Roop Nagar, Uriya Mohalla, Kumhari, Police Station-Kumhari, District-Durg (Chhattisgarh). Upon receiving information from her husband, Rohit Baghel, a Merg Intimation (Exhibit P-10) was lodged at Kumhari Police Station. Dead body panchnama (Exhibit P-2) was prepared, and the body was sent for postmortem examination. Dr. P. Akhtar (PW-13) conducted the postmortem examination and submitted a report (Exhibit P- 23), stating that Jyoti Baghel's death was caused by asphyxia due to hanging. During the examination, it was also found that the deceas
Insufficient evidence of instigation led to the upholding of acquittal in abetment of suicide case, affirming that claims must be backed by credible corroborative evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide, the requirement of mens rea for abetment, and the caution against ....
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 sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide, there must be clear evidence of intention and proximate acts that directly instigate the victim, which was lacking in this case.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC sections related to abetment of suicide.
To establish abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, clear evidence of instigation or incitement is required, which was not proven in this case.
The court emphasized that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC Sections 306 and 498-A; clear evidence of instigation is necessary.
In appeals against acquittal, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide.
Mere allegations of harassment without proximate actions leading to suicide do not constitute abetment under Section 306 RPC.
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires proof of direct instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid in suicide; generalized harassment allegations without proximate acts inciting suicide are insuff....
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
