Order on Board

DMAD18Ai aOg :tD2 i eHt 4I: aLA :2 l 5 MK0 y 9 2HM s +6 iAgE.00NnD 54 e 3. d 00 7 by

1. The present is an acquittal appeal under Section 413 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by the appellant/complainant against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 19-08-2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Durg, in Sessions Case No.35/2022 whereby the respondent/accused has been acquitted from the offence under Section 306 of the IPC.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/complainant is sister and respondent/accused is wife, of deceased Tej Prakash Sahu. Deceased Tej Prakash Sahu committed suicide on 31-05-2020 by hanging himself on neem tree adjacent to his residential house. Merg was informed to police and the dead body was sent for its postmortem to District Hospital Durg where PW-15 Doctor Alok Kumar Ramteke conducted postmortem of the deceased and opined the cause of death as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging and suicidal in nature and gave his report Ex.-P/20. After recording of the statement of the witnesses, FIR Ex.-P/18 was registered against the respondent/accused for the offence under Section 306 and 506 of the IPC. After completion of usual investigation charge sheet was filed against the respondent/accused before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg from where the same was committed to the learned Sessions Court, Durg for its trial.

3. The learned trial Court framed charge against the respondent/accused for the offence under Section 306 of the IPC which she denied and claimed trial.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses. The statement of the respondent/accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. has also been recorded in which she denied the circumstances that appears against her, pleaded innocence and has submitted that due to sorrow after death of her husband, his family members have falsely implicated her in the offence only to keep her away from the property of the deceased.

5. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent/accused holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and there is lack of evidence with respect to abetment to commit suicide or instigation and merely some incident between husband and wife does not amounted to abetment to commit suicide. The said judgment of acquittal is under challenge in the present acquittal appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/complainant would submit that there are sufficient and overwhelming evidence against the respondent/accused that she abetted the deceased to commit suicide. She would further submit that on 30-05-2020 the deceased Tej Prakash Sahu met with an accident when he along with his mother were going in his car and the said car fell down in Kotani Anicut whereby the mother Tej Prakash had died and the deceased was survived in that accident. At the time of last rites of his mother the present respondent/accused came to the house of the deceased and she teased the deceased responsible for death of his mother and why did he alive and he should have died in that accident and immediately thereafter the deceased committed suicide which is the direct cause of the incident to commit suicide by the deceased Tej Prakash Sahu, in the close proximity of time the deceased was teased by the present respondent/accused in the condition of deep sorrow on account of death of his mother, which has been seen by the present complainant and therefore, the same should have been considered to be instigation and abetment to commit suicide. Instead of pacifying the deceased, the respondent/accused instigated him that he should have also died in the accident which dragged the deceased in deep sorrow and to unbearable mental pressure for which he committed suicide by hanging himself on neem tree adjacent to his house. Therefore, the judgme