CF0000062097 J A w...” ‘J;.Z£.L_.._ £¥$¢mm {-7a'r’ n- m .a‘auu... m. . ...‘ mm... ‘Mvou‘. weighm, )mgie bu n \Vrm‘ma H IN frlh .HIGH COURT OF JUD‘ICATURE : AT JABALPUB. CRIMINAL AWEAL No. 9- ‘__/1999. 4/ J, /. Motiram Sahu son of Netram Sahu, aged 22 years, Agriculturlst xa} f Re51dent of Village Matla, PoliCe ‘ W ‘ Station Bhatapara, ,B/istrlct Ralpur cBmmAL may; UNDw sgc‘riomgzétm; ' ~ v ; OF Tm. Com: 03’ «1R1:~i1_,AL gaggggqgqa; i bomm, rxm- ’ ggggggg. U/s. 306 LP C. g 3‘1. for 1 years &fine 0f ¢ g/ w Rs.5,0Q0/- in default Eal-Egr, é V1 year./ j (M.P.). . ‘ ‘ .. .. ‘ V APPELLAQQ. (IN JAIL) ~ ‘ Vs. K7 State oi? Madny'a pradesh" Raisvommr a? 3. So as fa hold fhe accused/appenan‘l' guil+y, prasecgi‘ion has examined as many as 9 witnesses. Statement of The aécused persons were also recorded under Secficn 313 of The Céde of Criminal Procedure in which They denied The charge leveied against fhem and pleaded iheir innocence and false Imphca’non m The case % 4. Vide judgmen? dated 412 1998 +he tour? below has‘ ‘ acquLTTed ihe accused Nefram and Thagiabai however has cci‘nwcied the appellan? Moiimm for The offence punishable ur der£5ecfion 3‘06 of The Indian Penal Code. Hence This appeal: f A 5. Counsel for The appellant submiTs ThaT The; main; a egaTion againsT The appellanT is ThaT he never used To behave ,_ as husband and never used To sleep like a husband-He fur‘Then x sLibmiTs ThaT even if The enTire prosecution ease is Taken as iT is The offence under SecTion 306 IPC is noT made ouT because The basis IngredienTs of SecTIon 306 IPC in parhcular SecTion 107 IPC are noT aTTracTed In The presenT case *e . , Q i 6.3 On The oTher hand, counsel for The respondenT/STaTe supporTs The impugned judgmenT and submiTs ThaT The findings ' recorded by The CourT below being based on The evidence w: adduced by The prosecuTion are fuHy‘ jusTified' and ,jno V inTerference wiTh The same is warranTed. l 7 I have heard learned counsel for The parTies aT lengTh and perused The maTerial available on record Including The JudgmenT Impugned // /, ‘ 8. Prosecufion wh‘ness No. 1 $umi1’m Bai, cousin sisfer' of the deceased has stated in her cour’r gatemem Thai after marriage when The deceased met her she had infermed her {that she is being harassed by her husband, father-in—Iaw, §moTher-in—Iaw and. broiher-in—law by saying Thai fan and The Ln‘ensils which have been given are in broken condition n0 ifeleVIslon has been given She has further stated Thai her ,husband does no? iaik f0 her She fur‘iher sfaies fhai ‘though The appellan'r used To sieep wn‘h The deceased In fhe same bed ’but never used To iaik to her She also states Thai husband (appellant) used To sleep comforfably and used To Turn his back on her excepT This complaint There is no allegaTion agamsT The lappellanT‘ According To her, once The deceased had remarked lher l To be very lucky as she was loved by her husband because i l ishe was deprived of The same from her husband. l9. ShyamraTan (PW-2), faTher of The deceased has sTaTed iThaT once The deceased had informed him ThaT all The accused ‘lpersons used To harass her for dowry by saying ThaT The l larTicles, which were given in The dowry, were of inferior lqualiTy, This wiTness, however, has caTegorically sTaTed ThaT he fis noT aware as To whaT demand was made. He furTher sTaTes iThaT no PanchayaT meeTing whaTsoever was called by him even afTer knowmg ThaT his daughTer is m difficulTy Similar lsTaTemenT has been made by Mukhiram (PW 3) and no speCIfic pa L l , {__\ l allegaTIon is There agamsT any indivndual l l l l l i $10. Bhanwarsingh Sahu (PW-5), uncle of The deceased, has] also made general allegaTions againsT The accused/appellant :“This wiTness, however, admiTs ThaT his sTaTemenT under; Secfion 161 of fhe Code of Criminal Pracedur'e was recorded offer Two monfhs of The dafe of incident. 1§1. If The minor scruTiny of The evidence is done, iT appears ThoT The grudge of The deceased was ThaT The appellanT was - noT having physical relaTions wiTh her which she was expecTing from him IT also appears ThaT The deceased was under frusTraTion and unforTunaTely Took The drasTic sTep of ending v; her life 19‘24 Keeping m View The ingredienTs of SecTions 306 and 107 IPC ewdence as adduced by The prosecuTIon I am of The oonsgdered Vieyv ThaT The IngredienTs of abeTmenT are TaTaiIy dbsenT in The insTanT case for an offence under SecTion 306 IIPC. An offence under SecTion 306 IPC wouid sTand only if There is an ‘abeTmenT’ for The commission of The crime; Accordingly, in The presenT case offence under SecTion 306 IIPC is noT made ouT againsT The appellanT/accused. l 1l3. In The resulT, The criminal appeal succeeds and is allowed. 'l'he impugned judgmenT of The CourT below convicTing‘land " sEenTencing The appellanT/accused under SecTion 306 of The Iindian Penal Code is seT aside. The appellanT/accused is dcquiTTed of The charge under SecTion 306 of The Indian Penal Cfode. AppellanT/accused is reporTed To be on bail. His bail bimds ““"d discharged. Fine, if paid, be refunded. r v. $/ l Sdl- r 1 ll Pritinker Diwakeri Judge I r vi D/-l