Order on Board

28/02/2023

1. Aggrieved by the impugned Judgment dated 06.06.2000 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Balod District Durg in Session Trial No.

290/99, the Appeal has been filed.

2. Vide the impugned Judgment, the Appellants stand convicted for the offence punishable under Section 120-B & 306 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.

3. According to the Counsel for the Appellant, the two Appellants herein are husband and wife. The deceased in the instant case, upon whose death, the case has been made out, is Devki Bai, wife of another accused Sagar Ram. In all there were three accused put to trial in respect of the death of Devki Bai who died of consuming poison on 30.03.1999. The three accused persons were convicted vide the Judgment dated 06.06.2000. The two Appellants herein filed the instant appeal challenging the Judgment of conviction. The third accused Sagar Ram, husband of the deceased, filed a separate Appeal i.e. CRA No. 1605/2000. Pending the Appeal before this High Court, the Appellant- Sagar Ram in Criminal Appeal No. 1605/2000, died and the Appeal stood dismissed as having abated leaving the present two Appellants.

4. As per the prosecution story, it is a case where it is alleged that the accused- Sagar Ram (who has since died) is said to have a illicit relationship with the Appellant No. 2- Chemeli Bai in the instant case. When this fact came to the notice of villagers, a meeting was called. The two Appellants herein and Sagar Ram and the deceased Devki Bai, wife of the Sagar Ram, were socially boycotted from the Village.

5. It is the further case of the prosecution that as a consequence of the decision of social boycott taken by the Village-Panchayat, the three accused persons and the deceased Devki Bai is said to have taken a common decision for ending their lives by consuming poison. However, before anybody else could take a step, the deceased Devki Bai is said to have consumed the entire poison. After consuming the poison, she ran out of the house and came to Janki Bai (PW-2), the sister-in-law of Sagar Ram. There Devki Bai is said to have told Janki Bai (PW-2) that the three accused persons made her drink poison and before she could make any further statement, she collapsed. Immediately, thereafter, the Appellant No. 2- Chameli Bai also is said to have come to Janki Bai (PW-2), and she too fell unconscious before her and she too was taken to the hospital. There, Devki Bai succumbed. However, Chameli Bai survived.

6. Subsequently, a Crime was registered as Crime No. 453/99 at Police Station Gurur, District Durg (as it then exists, presently under District Balod). The matter was put to trial before the session Court. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and in defence, three witnesses were examined. Vide the impugned Judgment, three accused persons were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 120-B and 306 of IPC and have been ordered to undergo R.I.

for 7 years.

7. It is the contention of the Appellants that the prosecution has not been able to provide sufficient and cogent proof so far as the role played by the present Appellants, in the deceased committing suicide by consuming pesticide

8. It is the further contention of the Appellants that the prosecution has miserably failed in establishing the ingredients that are required for making out an offence under Section 306 for which they have been charged and found guilty. No proof so far as abetment on the part of the present Appellants is concerned, has been produced by the prosecution, so as to make out a case under Section 107 of IPC and in the absence of which, the offence under Section 306 of IPC would not be made out at all. Therefore, the impugned Judgment is liable to be set aside/quashed and the Appellants deserve to be acquitted of all the charges levelled against them.

9. The State Counsel opposing the Appeal submits that from the evidence collected by the Police Authorities in the course of investigati