Back
2018 Supreme(Jhk) 1615
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Timal Singh and Another – Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos. 1066, 1080, 1098 of 2017
Decided On : 12-03-2018A
For the Appellants : Mr. Anil Kumar, Ms. Chandana Kumari.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 306, 34, 307 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Judgment of Conviction – Suicide – Criminal appeals have been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial – Hence, these three criminal appeals are being disposed of together by this common judgment. – By the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellants have been found guilty for offence punishable under Section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with fine and appellants have also been found guilty for offence punishable under Section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code but were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine. – Held, Evidence in respect of manner of instigation by the accused persons to the deceased is vague and miserably falls short from constituting the offence punishable under section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. – Further Ext. A which is the suicide note left by the deceased wherein it was inter-alia mentioned that the deceased was voluntarily committing suicide and there was no reason for his committing suicide and only the deceased will be responsible for his death and none of his family members or relatives be harassed and further it was also mentioned therein that the appellant Sangita Singh is his elder sister-in-law (Bhabhi) and she should not be given any trouble, falsifies the case of prosecution. – There is no material in the record to discard or disbelieve the contents of the Exhibit-A. – Court have no hesitation in holding that evidence in record do not establish ingredients of abetment and is insufficient to bring home charge for offence punishable under Section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code against any of accused-appellants and this is a fit case where accused persons be acquitted of charge for offence punishable under section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code. – Court acquit the appellants of the charge for offence punishable under Section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly, impugned judgment convicting and sentencing them as mentioned above is set aside – Appellants named above are on bail – Appeals Allowed
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
1. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State.
2. These three criminal appeals have been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 07.06.2017 and order of sentence dated 09.06.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 08 of 2009. Hence, these three criminal appeals are being disposed of together by this common judgment.
3. By the said judgment of conviction dated 07.06.2017 and order of sentence dated 09.06.2017, the appellants namely Sangita Singh, Jeetu Singh @ Jitendra Kumar Singh, Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Timal Singh and Rana Pratap Singh have been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with fine and the appellants namely Lalpati Devi and Rozi Kumari have also been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code but were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine.
4. The case of the prosecution as mentioned in the written report, in brief is that the appellant namely Sangita Singh is the daughter-in-law of the informant and the deceased Jayendra Singh was the son of the informant. It is alleged that the appellant Sangita Singh who is the wife of other son of informant namely Bihari Singh, always used to mentally torture the deceased Jayendra Singh. It is also the case of the prosecution that Sangita Singh along with co-accused persons including all the appellants and others namely Urmila, Gorelal Paswan, Tinku Paswan, Bhola Paswan, Dharmendra @ Timal Singh, Jeetu Singh, Rozi Singh, Lalpati Devi, Pinki Kumari and Jyoti Kumari led by the appellant Rana Prasad Singh used to threaten the deceased Jayendra Singh to kill him. It is also alleged that all the accused persons of the case used to attempt to humiliate and insult the informant and on being annoyed and being threatened by the acts of cruelty of the accused persons, the deceased Jayendra Singh committed suicide by hanging himself in his room. On the basis of the written report of the informant police registered Jharia (Tisra) (Alkadih) P.S. Case No. 233 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. No. 2677 of 2007 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation, police submitted charge-sheet.
5. Upon commitment of the case to the Court of session charges for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against all the appellant-accused persons of the case and upon the accused persons pleading not guilty to the charges and claiming to be tried, they were put to trial.
6. In support of its case, the prosecution altogether examined eleven witnesses including the doctor who conducted the postmortem examination and the investigating officer of the case. Out of whom PW-1 Sanjay Kumar Singh, PW-4 Vijay Kumar Paswan and PW-9 Bhola Sao were declared hostile. PW-5 Rajendra Ram was only tendered for cross-examination.
7. PW-2 Smt. Sumitra Devi is the mother of the deceased. She has stated that the deceased Jayendra Singh was her youngest son. In the month of July 2007 at 6:00 am, she saw that Jayendra Singh has hung himself. As the accused persons used to threaten him hence, he committed suicide. In her cross-examination she has stated that Jayendra Singh has read up to B.A. She has further stated that Jayendra Singh had written a letter and police seized the said letter. On being identified by PW-2, the said letter has been marked as Ext. A. She has also stated that her eldest son Bihari Singh, along with his son Sonu and daughter also committed suicide prior to the suicide of Jayendra Singh.
8. PW-3 Ramdeep Singh is the father of the deceased and informant of this case. He has stated that on 07.07.07 at 5:45 a.m. PW-2 Smt. Sumitra Devi intimated him that Jayendra Singh has committed suicide. He
