IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR L (CHHATTISGARTHI r. A eal No. l?° APPELLANT Barse Kannal S/o Shri Barse Ganga, Aged about 3O years. Resident of> Village Nanda Gunda, P.S. Podiya, Distt. Malkhangiri (Orissa) VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh through Police— Station Doranapal, Distt. Dantewada. APPLICATION t U/S 374g0f at z) £ Cr.P.C. 1973 C . HgGH COUR‘F OF CHHATE$QARE¥ AT EéLASPUR (Han. Mr. Jastice Pyitinkesr Giwakér‘; Criminal Appeai Na. 17G 9f 2am AP?ELLAN? Barrage Kama . VERSUS Shri Deepak Jain csunse? f0? the appel!ant Shr§ Vaibhév Gweréhan Pi far respanéentfsta’te. CREMENAL APPEM." LW3ER $ECT‘KkN W4 E2; 3F W’EE €GQE OF CRiMiNkL ?R8€EDHRE. J 3d? {E G M E N T (29.€}6.2M§) ' ’ This appeei is directed against the iucigment end enter dated 13.’§2.2030 passed by 3rd AdditmnaE Sasséans Judge: Bamtar, Jagadaipur En Sessions Triai No. 119/20GO Qanviciing the accu-Sedlappaélant undey Sectbn 306 of the :ndian Penai Cade aad saniemmg him ta andergo {igorous imprisanmeni‘fmtem yaars and pay féna sf Rs 5033 ‘m tiefau‘it a? payment 6f fine to further undEi‘ga rigsmus impfisanmem far (me year. 2. Case of the presecution En brief is that marriage 9f deceaged Same Mangi Was soEemnized with the acbueecifappeiéant sometime in the mehth of ApriE $99 and she Commié'xee suéoioe or; 29.12.?9§§ by ooheuming poison in her parente‘ house ae there was some {iispute between her ehdrf accused/appet!ant. Merg intimation was recorded on 3Cr,12.19QQ ano" based on thaa FIR was eiso regieiered on'3G.‘i2.1999 for the of§enoe as meniioned above but ,bei-h merg intimatmn and FER have not been exhEbited by the proseou‘iion’. 3. Se as to hoid the eeoueed/appeiiant guiity, prGSecution has examined es many eel; wiihesses in support of he case. Statement e? me eecueeds’eppehant wee aéeo recerded under section 313 of the Code o $rim§ner Pmoedere in which he denied the charge ieveiredagaéast him and p§eeded his innocence and ieiee impiioetion in. ihe ease rrjw//\ v ' RESPGNEENT State of Chhaitisgarh . Heard counsel .fcr the partées anci perused the materiaE avaEiabie an record including the iudgmeni; impugned. 5. Counsel far the appeiiant submits that evan if the entire case cf the presecuticm is takan as it Es, the offence under Seaman 3E5 IPC is net made ou% against the rappenant as the' basic ingredients 0f abetment as enshrined under Section 10? IPC are oat attracted 3n the present case. He submits that even the mother end father of the deceased namety Karem Bah (PW—2} and Karem Deva {PW—3‘ have not supported the orceecwm case and have been dectqred hostlte 8. On the other hand eupporting the impugned jtrdgment ccunset for the respondent/State submits that the tmpugned judgment is strictly ih accordance with taw and does not cail fcr any interference in this eppeat. 7. Undtsputed facts of the case are that on 29.12,t§§9 deceased Barse tV‘angi committed suicide tn her parems’ house by cansumtng porson During tnat neither merg intimataon nor the FtR has oeen exhibited by the crcsecut . The prasecuttcn has examined onty four Witnesses namety Dr. Uttam Koustk (PW-1), who had performed post ‘mertem of the deceased, Karam \Bo’jji (PW-2) & Karam Dei/a (PW-3‘) — mother and father ot‘ the deceased and S. R. Sahu {PW-4) who had done part ct the investigation. Both mother and father of the deceased have not suppoded the prosecution case and have turned hostiie Even Dr Utta'n Koas (PW-’3) has not stated ti‘at the deceased dzed because of conscmrr‘g person 8. Thus in the tight of the aforesaid discussion, the cruciai questtcn to be answered by this Court is Whether the aiiegations made againstthe j appetiant can make out a case under Section 306 IPC. Answer ts of course ‘ ‘no’ for the reason that the ingredients of abetment defined tinder Section 107 IPC do not have even a Fieeting giimpse thereto To have a ready reference the said provusion Is reproduced as under $eotron 10f. A person abets the doing of a thing, who — First. - instigates any person to do that thing; or 4 Secotm'fy — Engages with me or more other person Gr persons m aoy conspiracy for me doing of {hat thiog, ff an aof or illega! omissfon takes places in pursuance of thaf conspiracy, and in order to the domg of that fhing; of Third!y.- {ntentionaliy aids, by any ocf ar’iifegaf omi5$ion, the doi'ng of that thiog. Explanation 1. — Arpelson who, by wiiiful mfsmpresentai‘ion, 0f by wiiffw conceafmenf of a materiai fact which he is bound it: disofose, voluntarfly causes or procwes; or attempts to cause or procure, a thing L‘o be done, is said fa insfigaé‘e the doiog of thai thing. Expiaoation 2.- Whoever, either prior to or at the time of toe commission of an act, does aoything in order to faoiiitate the commission of that act, and thereby faciiitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.” 9. To convict a. person for an offence under $ect§on 306 IPC it has to be seen that instigation to do a oamcuiat théng must be there. ‘instigation’ morally means provocation, incttement, urge or persuasion to do any thing. None of the witnesses examined by the prosecution has stated that the deceased was abetted by the appetiant to commit suicide even pareoéts of the deceased have not supported the prosecution case and have turned hostiie. The entire evidence brought on record goes to show that the deceased was not actuated by any abetment to end her iife by Committing suicide rather ii couid be the menial imbaiance which dro‘ie her to do so. \/ The aforesaid discussion if weighed with ins evidence on record, does not give any ciue to maintain the impugned iudgment convicting and sentencing the appeiiani as shown above. impugned judgment is not in consonance With the material ooiiecied by the prosecution and therefore, it has to be disiodged. ‘EO. 11. Appeai. as a result, is aiiowed and the judgmeni impugned is set aside. Appeliani is acquitted of the charge ieveiied against him. Appeiiani is aiready on baii. His icail bonds stand discharged. The fine amount if W /~s,, r y deposited by the appeiiant be refunded to him. r ”i f“ Judge