1. This case was listed on 16/04/2018 but no one appeared, therefore, the case was adjourned and it was directed to be listed after two weeks. Thereafter, this case was listed on 02/08/2018 and on that date also no one appeared on behalf of the appellant.

2. The appellant was granted bail on 19/07/1999, even in the absence of counsel for the appellant.

3. From the order-sheets, it is clear that this case was listed thrice prior to 02/08/2018. On 21/06/1999, when the case listed for the first time before the Court, Shri I.B. Singh counsel for the appellant appeared and record was requisitioned.

Thereafter, it was listed on 19/07/1999 and none appeared for the appellant, despite that, after considering the allegations levelled against the appellant, this Court granted bail and sentence awarded to the appellant was suspended. Thereafter, on 16/04/2018 also no one appeared for the appellant. On 02/08/2018 also none appeared for the appellant. It appears that after obtaining bail, counsel for the appellant has not been interested in arguing the case.

4. Under these circumstances, in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the matter of Surya Baksh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2014 (14) SCC 222, this Court has no option, but to go through the record and decide the appeal on merits. Accordingly, case was heard on 02/08/2018.

5. This criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the conviction and sentence dated 04/05/1999 passed by 1st ASJ, Dewas in S.T. No.40/1998 by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 306 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo the rigorous imprisonment of 5 years and a fine of Rs. 2000/-with default imprisonment.

6. The necessary facts in short are that on 30/05/1997 one Kailashchand was found dead having committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. It is also undisputed that almost all the prosecution witnesses are members of the same family and prior to 15-20 days of the incident, Govind (PW/1) had beaten the appellant. Similarly, on the report of Laxmibai (PW/6) criminal case was instituted against the appellant Motilal for offence under Section 294, 323, 506 (Part-II) of IPC and appellant was convicted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 05/11/1998 and criminal appeal No.137/1998 was pending before the Court of II ASJ, Dewas.

7. On 30/05/1997, the deceased Kailash committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. Merg enquiry was registered under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. On the basis of statements of the witnesses, the offence under Section 306 of IPC was registered against the appellant Motilal and co-accused Yusuf @ Irshad. During investigation, it was found that as appellant and co-accused Yusuf @ Irshad were harassing the deceased Kailash for recovery of money, as a result of which, Kailash committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. During investigation, 10 tablets of sulphas were recovered from the spot, where the dead-body of the deceased was lying and one diary of the deceased Kailash containing details of different money transactions was produced by Rakesh Patidar, son of the deceased. Dead-body was sent for postmortem and after collecting the material against the appellant and co-accused Yusuf @ Irshad, police filed charge-sheet for the offence under Section 306 of IPC.

8. The Trial Court vide order dated 09/09/1998 framed charge under Section 306 of IPC against the appellant as well as against co-accused Yusuf @ Irshad.

9. Appellant as well as co-accused Yusuf @ Irshad abjured their guilt and pleaded not guilty.

10. The prosecution in order to prove its case, have examined Govind Singh (PW/1), Dineshchand (PW/2), Moolchand Patidar (PW/3), Ashok (PW/4), Dr. K.N. Tripathi (PW/5), Laxmibai (PW/6), Ramchand (PW/7), J.K. Namdeo (PW/8), Babulal (PW/9), Ramcharitra Dubey (PW/10), M.S. Chouhan (PW/11) and Premnarayan (PW/12).

11. The appellants examined Takesingh (DW/1) and Taj Mohd. (DW/2) in their defence.

12. The