2026:CGHC:7940 NAFR INDRAJEET INDRAJEET SAHU SAHU Date: 2026.02.23

10:47:50 +0530 ACQA No. 403 of 2024

1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Surguja (C.G.)

... Appellant Versus

1 - Shivlal Jaiswal S/o Late Mahadev Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 50 Years R/o House No.4, Vivekanand Nagar Kisan Rice Mill Marg Ambikapur, Police Station- Gandhinagar, District Surguja (C.G.).

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Ms. Supriya Upasne, Govt. Advocate and Ms. Richa Sahu, Panel Lawyer.

For Respondent : Shri Amrito Das, Advocate.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board

12.02.2026

1. The present Acquittal Appeal under Section378(3) CrPC has been filed by the State against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 14.03.2022 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja in Sessions Case No.36/2020 where by the respondent accused has been acquitted from the offence under Section 306 IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, in the intervening night of 29-

30.12.2018 the deceased Manoj Singh committed suicide in his house by hanging himself. The merg was reported to the police. During merg enquiry, the dead body was sent for its postmortem and statement of witnesses were recorded. After the statement, an FIR Ex.P/24 was registered against the respondent accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC. During investigation, a suicidal note was recovered from the purse of the deceased which was kept in back pocket of his pant. The said suicidal note was written in back side of a cheque of his bank account. The said suicidal note was sent for its examination to Handwriting Expert at State Examiner of Questioned Document, Police Headquarter, Raipur and a report was obtained.

3. Statement of witnesses were recorded and after completion of usual investigation charge sheet was filed against the accused person before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur, from where the case was committed for its trial to Sessions Court and the same was transferred to the trial court. The trial court framed charges for the offence under Section 306 IPC against the respondent accused. The accused denied the allegations and claimed trial.

4. In order to establish the allegation against the respondent, the prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses. Statement of accused person under Section 313 CrPC have also been recorded in which he denied the circumstances that appears against him, pleaded innocence and have submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the offence.

5. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties, the trial court acquitted the respondent accused persons from all the offence vide judgment dated 14.03.2022 which is under challenge in the present Acquittal Appeal by the State.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/State would submit that prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt but for minor omissions or contradictions, the evidence of prosecution witnesses are completely reliable which have been supported by the suicidal note written by the deceased. In suicidal note he clearly pointed towards the harassment met by the respondent accused by which he committed suicide. In the eve of alleged incident, the deceased shared his condition to his mother PW-3 Satni Devi who duly proved the harassment given by the respondent to the deceased. The deceased was indebted from various persons and respondent was pressurizing him for refund of his amount despite having paid the excess amount towards interest and principal. From the evidence of witnesses PW-2 & PW-4, the prosecution has proved that in close proximity of time the deceased was harassed by the respondent and he was having no option except to commit suicide. The suicidal note has wrongly been disbelieved by the trial court and the impugned judgment of acquittal is perverse in view of evidence available on record. From Call Detail Report and WhatsApp chatting report obtained by the police from the Cyber C