NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally signed ALOK by ALOK SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2026.03.19

19:14:05 +0530 ACQA No. 512 of 2024

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sarsiwa District-

Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - Lalkrishna Jatwar S/o. Parasram Jatwar Aged About 36 Years R/o. Village Pipardula, P.S. Sarsiwa, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Kumari Vinita Jatwar D/o. Parasram Jatwar Aged About 30 Years R/o. Village Pipardula, P.S. Sarsiwa, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant/State : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer.

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Laxmi Gupta, on behalf of Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shr i Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

Judgment on Board

11/03/2026

1. The present acquittal appeal has been filed by the appellant/State under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 27.04.2019 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Balodabazar (C.G.) in Sessions Case No. 46 of 2016, whereby the respondent/accused persons have been acquitted from the offence of Section 306 of IPC.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 12.12.2015, in the intervening night of 11.12.2015 and 12.12.2015, the deceased Indra Jaatwar, wife of respondent/accused No. 1, committed suicide by hanging herself in her house. The merg was reported to the police on 12.12.2015 by the brother of the deceased, and the inquest (Ex. P/2) was prepared by the police in the presence of witnesses. The dead body was sent for post- mortem to the Community Health Centre, Bhilaigarh, where PW-8 Dr. Ritesh Sen conducted the post-mortem of the dead body of the deceased and submitted his report (Ex. P/4). After conducting the post- mortem, the doctor opined that the cause of death was cardiac arrest and suffocation caused by hanging, and the nature of death was suicidal. On 14.12.2015, a written complaint (Ex. P/2) was lodged by Santosh Kumar Mahilong (PW-1), alleging that the deceased was murdered by the accused persons. Thereafter, FIR (Ex. P/5) was registered against the accused persons for the offence under Section

306/34 of the IPC.

3. Statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. have been recorded and after completion of usual investigation charge-sheet was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhatgaon, District Balodabazar Bhatapara. The case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Court, Balodabazar from where the same has been transferred to the learned trial Court for its trial.

4. The learned trial Court has framed charge against the respondent/

accused persons for the offence under Section 306 of IPC, in which they denied and claimed trial.

5. In support of their case the prosecution has examined 04 witnesses.

Statement of the respondent/ accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. have also been recorded in which they denied the circumstances that appears against them, pleaded innocence and submitted that the respondent accused No.1 submitted that his wife was suffering from breast ulcer and she was depressed that she could not recovered from that ailment thereby she committed suicide.

6. After appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent/accused persons, holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons abetted the deceased to commit suicide and that there is no evidence with respect to instigation to commit suicide. The said judgment of acquittal is under challenge in the present acquittal appeal.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/State would submit that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. But for minor omissions and contradictions, the evidence of prosecution witnesses are reliable which have been supported by the prosecution witnesses. There are suffic