IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR v ^-•T-l Cr.M.P. No. '~/ ~)012007 EL APPEAL No. 12007 APPLICANT/ APPELLANT State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The District Magistrate, District Bilaspur VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS/ RESPONDENTS ,•»• ^e<<°" ^\£ ''"^ .-^s^ WM' o.^' B.B. Sukhdeve S/o Baliram Sukhdeve aged about 52 years. Permanent resident of Village Borgaon (Khurd) Post Phetari, Police Station- Kamleshwar District Nagpur. Present resident of Pragati Vihar Colony, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur. APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 378 (3) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR GRANT OF LBAVE ^.ND MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER_SECTION 378 (ILOFJBE CODE OF CMMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973. ^c^ -u;fc^LL-aa&S£d.JS^L^- x^ i-IB Wj m .''lp'1' >«niniK G HIOH COURT OF CHHATTISGASai AT BILA8PUS k'KER DIWAKER CE.M.P. N0. 338/2007 State of Chliattisgarh B.B. Sukhdeve APPUCATIOK CMDER SECT10N 3?8(31 OF THS Cr.P.C. FOR GRANT OF LEAVE &s MBMORANDUM QF APPEAL UNDER 8ECTION 378(11 OF 7HE CR.P.C. Shri Praveea. Das, Dy. G.A. for fhe petitioner/Sts.te. Shri V.C.OttaIwar, counsel for fhe respoadeiit. 0+3)|| •'s- (10.02.201Q) Heard on adinission. T.tie picsent petition which is baiTed by 10 days is directed aganist the iiapugaed judginent dated 12.3.2007 passed by the Additional Sessious Jiidge, Bilaspur in S.T. No. 300/2005 whereby fhe accused/respondent has been acquitted for fhe ofleace under Section 306 iPC. 2. Brieffacts oftbe case are that on the basis ofwritten report Ex.P/13, FIR Ex. P/16 was todged by P.W.-ll Bansilal fafher of the deceased aeqiast fhe accused/respondent for fhe coiiiiuissioa of ttie offence imder Section 306 IPC. It is aUeged that the accused/respondent was workiag as forem.cn ia the Indian Archaeological Survey Department Sub Division Office Biiaspur aad at the relevaat tnne the aeceased was workiaj as Chowkidar in fhe said office. It is aUeged fiiat a sum of Rs. 50,000 was deiuanded by fhe accused/respondeat tor regularization of the deceased aiid out ofwhich Rs. 30,000 was paid to him aad as he could not pay fhe reinamia^ amoiuit of Rs. 20,000 he was subjected to harassment. It is E"iSssSii 1 %:S'iS|| \^ ^-i.wf^' farther aUeged that the. deceased coaa.iaitted suicide by coHunR in front of a running train. 3. In support of its case, the prosecutioa has examiaed as m.any as luneteen witaesses. Stateinent of fhe accused was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. i& whicfa tie denied tbe charge levefled against biai axid pleaded his ittnocence. Tbis apart, one defence witness bas also been examiaed by him ia support ofhis case. 4. After heariiig couiisel for the parties, the (^curt below has acqiutted the accused person. Hence th.is petition. 5. Contention of Shri Das is that the present is a case where fbe deceased was harassed to fhe extent where he was left with no other option but to conunit suicide. He furtber submits that despite fhe evidence avaflable on record the Court below Iias erred in law in. acquittmg the accused persoa. 6. On the other hand supportiag fhe judgineat impugned it has been ai^ued by Shri Ottalwar that the judgnient iinpugned is in accordance with law. He furfber subiiiits that ia anappeal against acquittal the fiading of the Courts below cannot be reversed unless fbe same is found to be perverse. 7. I have heard counsel for the parties aad perused tfae niaterial available on record includiag ftie judgiaent impugned. 8. Tbe prosecutioa case is mainly based on the seizure of a diaiy (Ex.P/2) owned and aUegedly written by the deceased which was seized at fhe time of iaauest. In this diaiy it has been mentioned by tiie deceased that he was subjected to harassinent for demaad of nioney by the accused. The haadwritmg ia the diaiy has not been proved by the prosecution. Even assiuniug that fhe saul diary is written bv the deceased the same itselfwould not bring the .v^i^ .«»»^Ba'sf>. ^\ •63i> " ^ j' l present case withia the ambit of Section 306 in particular Section 107 IPC. The record farther reveals that fhere was no aUegation leveUed against the accused/respondent aud fhe case diaiy stateiaent of niost of fhe witoesses were recorded after fhree inonths. S3^'t^t:^'^ 9. The entire evidence as adduced by ffae prosecution. has been duly considered by the Court below to arrive to a pardcular conclusion and' acquitted tbe accused/ respondent. 10. In view of the inaterial avaflable on record and not being foi^etful of fhe settled legal position that in a petition agaiast acquittal iftwo views are possible on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution and fhe trial Court takiag one view favoured fhe accused, reversion of findings of acquittal by the appeUa.tc Court taking ffae ofher possible view into consideration is not penuissible, fhis Court is of fhe view that fhe judgment uupugned acquitting fhe respondent/accused of the offence as alleged is just and proper aud no iaterference therewith is warranted. The petition fafls and is accordingly disniissed on the ground of limitation as well as on merits also. ____ _ - - Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge ;