3H COURT OF CHHATTISMftH AT BXLASPUR te, 1,96 <sf 1992 AB@dfants 1. Baboojiram Son of l-larbanshiaj Kaushik aqed 34 yeara, resident of Cnantapar-a, Biiaspiir'. 2. Shyamkunwar, wtfe of Harbcinshiai KausS-t.ik, cqed 56 years I'esidant of fcncn'rut;ra. Biiasaur. SesE'c-ndent ma! Verajs The State of .A'l.adhya Pmdesh (Now Chhatt'isgarh) •rtir'c.ugh O.M. Bliapajr (A'v.P.) (Now C.6.) Appea! under- Section 374 of Cr.P.C.) Honbie AAr. T.P, Shorma.J. PrssBnt^- Mr-.Atul Pandey, counsei for the appeJfants. '.U.K.S.Chandet, Pcriel iawver- for 1+is Stat®. yassed on 7th July, 2010) 1. Chcl!e.nge in thi ppea! is to the judgment of conviction & order of se.n-ts.r.cs. dated 31.1.1992 paased by the 3''° Additiorsai Sassions Jydge, iiisi^iur, in Sessions Cass No.121/88, whereby & whereunder Seai-nsd 3 Additwntti Sessions Judge after holdmg The oppeliwts guihy for- the offence punishabie under Sections 306 •;& 498-A of the Indim Penai Code and sen+$Bced tkem to under'go rigorous i'npr'isonment for three yesrs & to pay f'"e of Rs.25"/- cnd rigor'ous iwpriswwen* for one. year & to poy fi"e. of fts.250./-,'- irf defauit of peyment of fina to further underqo simpte impr'isonment for one month, on eflciT-eount. ? Convictio" is challenged on the gr'ound withc'ut any prov'e of the fact of commisslo" of suicide a"d cruelt/, ihe tnai Court has convicted & sentenced.the cppellonts os aforsmenttoned and thereby cornmitted iHeg"lBy, - " • ^--^1 ,.i _..„-...-.——.- ^ "s 3. Case of the pr'o»cutio", 'm brief, is that deccased Lacha"bai was married to appetlont No.l Babujiram. Appellont No-2 is mol+ier of husband of •ths dececfied- The. flippelkmts cmd their relatiyes we.re. cemwtt'mg tortur«and crueity' upon Lcd'ionboi fsmoe deceased) since 6-7 years, just after her marriege. on accoant of demoRd of dowry ond os a r-esutt of such torture md crue!ty" Lacheu-sbai teft.+he. house. of the oppe.llants and we.nt near rojfwoy tine whe.re. she committed' Aricide- bea'Hi of •the deceased was intimoted to the. poiice es unRnown dea+h by 1+>e rcilwoy authorities vde E^.P/6. tterg intimo+ion wns recorded vde Ex.P/13. After' summoning the wi'tnesses v'de Ex.P/7, inquest over the dead bc-dy of the deceased as unknown wornnn was prapared vids Ex.P/8. bead body was sent foc autopsy to fiovernment Sa»-dar Vnllabhbhai PcsteS Ho^:.ttal, Biiospur vide Ex.P/4. Autc.psy was conducted by br'.Rajiy Rotna T!'"a»'ifl>W-4) and found se-rious mjury. Cause of deal+i wss sh"c|< as a result of excesswe heamo!*r'hage. Iroken piecss of bongle.s, one meta! ring and piece of ribbori we.re· Kized fr'otn the spot v'd®Ex.P/9. Articfes feund c'ver the body of the (tecetssed we.re. seoted <md a'zed vsde E?<.P/tO. Sp&t map was prepared vide Ex-P/il. Written reporl- was lodged by Horiial, brother of •rtie deeeassd vide Ex.P/3 and on the basis of wrif'er' report, F.I.R. was todged vide Ex.P/14. Copy of the saie deed Ex.P/2 was seized vide Ex.P/'l. 4. Statements of the witnes!»swe.«recorded unde.r SectiOR 161 of the Code of Crimina! Procedure, 1973 (in ^iort' liie C.ocie') and after compietwn of investigatwn. charge sheet wns fiied befor-e the Aeiditionci Chief Judicia! Mcg'stratB, Biiaspur, who in lurn comm'tted the cn«to tha Court" of Ssssions, Bi.lsspu", fi-orri vAere iearned 3 Additional Sessiona Jue^e, Bi!nspur"r^cehfed thc CGSK on tr'unsfer' for trial. 1t S. I" order to provs the guilt of the ttecused/appellants, the pr-osecutron hns examined as wcny as 15 witnesses. The accused were ewimined unde,!' Section 3t3 of the Cc-de where they denied tha c'rojmstances appear'n! cgainst ther" imd ciaimed innocence on<j faia in-.pl'.catten in the cr'ime in 4'-: 'quas+ion. The appeflants haye n!s®exom'nad defence. wtness Baldou, whc- hcs denosed i" his ev'dence •t^icst deeeased LQchan&ai was mamed wj+h .fe .I--NI dppetfmt Babuji m the year 1976. He hos furtfier deposed that dowry is not preyailjng in their caste. 6. After pi'ovidiRg opporruREty of hearing to the par-ties, tearned 3 Additional Sessions Judge, B'fospur' whiie aequJttmg seven accused cony'cted A se.ntenced the present appeltets as cforementioned. •» 7. I have. hear'd teafned counsei for "riie parties, perused the judgment <__s impugr'ed a"d re.cord of the tr'Gl Ce'urt. . L Learned c&unsei fo?" the oppeifants ve-heiBently argtied thct cs per svidence of Itte pr'osecution, mnrriage took p!nc«m the yeor t976 and the deceosed has committed *uicide in the year 1987, after lapse of 11 years, sh®was haying four children, the cypetlonts have not committ^ed ony torture or c'-uelty upon the deceasec in connectwn with demand of dowry <md she has "<?t committed su'cide on ihe- date of incjdent but while she was crossmf railwoy fine she. dfed as a resuft of accident. In the. absenca, of cny prove relating to suiclde, conyictton & senten<»of •rtte iypeHaits under Section 306 of ths Indian Pena! Cc.de are not sus+ainotole under th.e iaw. 9. On the other- hand, lear-ned State counsel supported the judgment impugned and argued that •tfts appeHnnts had demmdad dowry to the \^ dececad <i"d in connection wi-A de'mond of dowry they have comntitted torti-'re ond crue,!ty upon he.f ar-d compelfed her to con'mlt suicide and as a resu't of such torti.ire ana cnjelty she has commi+ted suicide. 10. In order t<? nppreciate the ar'guments advanced on behatf of the parttes, I hnve examined the matsrial ava'labfe on record. ll.'In the pr'e.sent o6se, deceased Lachonbaj was found dead 'n railwey track. Nathulal Sahu, A-Smde Loca Driyer- w^o was tnivellmg rail engme at the tiina of incident hos deposed that on 14.8.87 he WE>S rreveiling ^he tr'ain No.355 at nbout 11-15 n.m. While he wus trnvetling the trum betwesn .;,; ©atourato 'B'lffSpur one womaR was comlng near home signal and was crossm^ railway line, he gave hnm for coution ond cinrm. He has further <iepo%:d that at that-titRe ogricul+ura! opemtinn season was going on and persoRS used to pass •rtie raiiway lins. Engine dashed a woman while ahe was crossing railwoy line and as a resutt of auch dash ri-se die.d. He, went t6 the pol'ce station nnd iodged -the report yide Ex.P/6. In his detaii cross- excmination, he has specifically deposed •that at •riiat time woman wcs crossing raiiway tine and he w-os aiarwng the persons by givmg hom, eyen when he aw thnt a womon was crossing reilway he again gaye hom but woman did not stop and tried to cross tbe raUwcy line ond at That timB the ~ - incident took piace. He has specificaily deposed that shs wo.s not iying in the raitwoy Hne und Ae was crossing ra'lway' !ine. Sub In^ector Subhash Singh Q'W-7), who hns prepored inquest of dead body vide Ex.P/8, has ontegoricQSIy deposed the injury found over* the deo.d body. IZ.The prosecution has examined Morifai iiaushtk (PW-2). brether of th.® daceassd, who has deposed in his evideflce that on t4.8-87, appelfant- Babujirom went his house cnd infot*med that he-r sister i.e. dscwtsed Lacha'ibai hns gone out ®fhis house whom he asted whe-rher he has todqed . the repoft or not, +hey went to «wchhis sister, but they d'id not found the deceassd. On the second dcy. they came to know by newspoper about "tiie 'ncident, then •they went to poiice s'tation where •rtiey found dead bedy of thnt unknown womon was the dedd body of his sister Lechonba' (smce decaased). burga 8as PW-9) has aiso cocroborate.d -the eyidencs of Horilc! Kaushik PW-Z). 13.The prosecutwn has not caiduced aiy evidenoe to show •rtiat the house of the oppeite-nts ond tke decea«d wns st+uated near the raiiway tfne. The prosecution h.as also not adduced ony evidBnc®to sh&w •tho.t on that doy ony incid^nt/'ook place in the house of the o^pelkmts which compelied her t& commit sufeide. •*•%••• 14.As per eyi.den.ee of retotives of the deceased, the appellonts have comm'tt'ed tor+ur-e and cruelty In connectlon with demond of dowry since jast 6-7 yews. The deceased was having four chiidren wid one issue wo.s .rdied m +he hcuse of Horilal Kaush'k, br'o'tt'er of the dec«ised. No ^sscific iiistEmce rekitwg to tortur®dnd cruelty has been sta-ted by •thase ^ witnesses, but of five 'saies duri"g tha tenun- of 7 years of meritQl I'fe (after Soumi) and 'm th®iabsence of cny ^ec'fic instfflic«of cruelty. 'it is difficutt to hotd that the appeilemts have committed toriure and cruelly, thnt too in connection with denwnd of d«?wry. On the aate of incident Lachtmbai dfed but only on account <?f her dealh, it cannot be inferred that ^ie, has committed suicide uniess c'rcumsta"c<s ex'st for presumption nf such suictde. 15-The pr'osecutio" has not adduced my evidence before sud) incident sufficient for draw'ng inference that on the date of Incident the appellonts have committed torture ond cruelty <L"d their behayio'' were abnormat whidi compeiled -t+ie deceased far commisstor! of suiciite, inter alia. 1+se evidence of Na-rtiula! Sahu yW-5). drive?' oniy eyewitness of the mcident reyeals that she was nc't sitt'ing necr the r'aiiwoy line, she wcs not sieeping over the raiiwoy line but she was crossmg ra'iwoy iine. He gaye aiarm, but at that time enqina dnshed a womon and woman dfed css a rssuit ^ of such daA. These facts are not sufficient for drawing inference that she has not committed suic'de but she died as a resLilt of occident. 16. Whiie. coriv'cting the q)pe!lflnts under Sections 306 & 498-A of the Indian Penai Code the triai Court hns not considered the cforesaid aspect a"d evidenee of Nathu'ial Sahu and thereby commh^ed illegality. 17. For the foregoin9 reasons, cenyirtlon & sentenc« of l+ie oppeiiants under- Sections 306 & 498-A of the Sidian Penal Code are riot sustnmable undsr the kiw. Tne appeal is allowed. Conyiction & sentence of the appeilsnts under Sections 306 & 498-A of the Ind'iu" Pena! Code are hereby »t aside. The (^p'eilants b«set ut iiberty at once. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge