1 2025:CGHC:22569-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 328 of 2010 State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Appellant versus 1. Manthir Sahu, S/o Prabhuram Sahu, Aged About 50 Years, 2. Govind Ram Sahu, S/o Manthir Sahu, Aged About 28 Years, 3. Smt. Ratna Sahu, W/o Manthir Sahu, Aged About 40 Years, All Are R/o Village Sakari, P.S. Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.). ... Respondents For Appellant/State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Suresh Tandan, Advocate. DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 09/06/2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 07/10/2004, CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.09 17:45:02 +0530 2 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari (Sessions Division), Raipur (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.35/2002, whereby, the respondent- Govind Ram Sahu and his father- Manthir Sahu and mother- Smt. Ratna Sahu were acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC. 2) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the marriage of the deceased, namely, Smt. Temin Bai was solemnized with the respondent - Govind Ram Sahu on 22/04/2000. It is alleged by the prosecution that after the solemnization of her marriage, she was harassed and maltreated by her in-laws and husband on account of illegal demand of ornaments, owing to which, she committed suicide while consuming poison on 14/09/2001 and died during course of her treatment in the hospital. On account of the alleged incident, merg intimation was lodged by Ward-boy of the concerned hospital and based upon the enquiry, an FIR (Ex.P-5) was registered by the Police Station Kurud on 07/10/2001 against her husband and in-laws with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC and after completing the investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhamtari against the respondent and her father and mother, in connection with Crime No.278/2001 for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B read with Section 34 and 498-A of IPC and the matter was, thereafter, committed to the concerned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, who in turn, has framed the charge against the husband of the deceased and her in-laws 3 under Section 304-B of IPC and, the charge so framed were denied by them and claimed to be tried. 3) In order to bring home the guilt of the husband and his parents, the prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents, while one was examined by the them in their defence. 4) The Trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that the husband of the deceased and her in-laws were not involved in connection with the alleged crime and accordingly, they have been acquitted from the offence mentioned here-in-above and, being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred and vide order dated 08/07/2010, the same has been admitted only against the husband of the deceased, namely, Govind Ram Sahu. 5) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/State submits that the findings of the trial Court holding that the husband of the deceased was not involved in connection with the alleged crime, is apparently contrary to the materials available on record, in as much as, the evidence led by the prosecution, has not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting him from the commission of the alleged crime. 6) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the concerned trial Court. 4 7) We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 8) From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent, who was the husband deceased, was charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC and, in order to bring home the guilt of the respondent with regard to the alleged offence, it was incumbent upon the prosecution to establish the fact that soon before her death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for or in connection with any demand of dowry and only thereafter, they could be held guilty with regard to the offence mentioned here-in-above. 9) While keeping the ingredients provided under the aforesaid provisions, it is necessary to examine the evidence led by the prosecution. 10) Ramasra, who was the father of the deceased was examined as PW-1 and, it appears from a bare perusal of his statement that he was informed by his deceased daughter that she was harassed by her father-in-law and mother-in-law with regard to the alleged demand of dowry, however, no allegation as such, was, however, informed by her against her husband as revealed from his testimony. That apart, it appears from the statement of him (Ex.D-1) recorded during the merg inquiry, that his deceased 5 daughter was well in her in-laws house, and has not raised any kind of suspicion either against her husband or in-laws. 11) Shyambai, who was the mother of the deceased was, examined as PW-7 and it was stated by her specifically at paragraph 7 that her daughter has not alleged any complaint regarding the demand of dowry either by her husband or by her in-laws. 12) Brother of the deceased, namely, Dhanesh Sahu was examined as PW-6 and according to his evidence, it appears that he was informed by his deceased’s sister that the alleged demand of dowry was made by her father-in-law and mother-in-law, but has not stated that what kind of demand was made by them, nor has stated anywhere that she was harassed or maltreated by her husband, namely, Govind Ram Sahu on account of the alleged demand of ornaments. 13) Latabai (PW-2), who was the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the deceased has also not stated anywhere regarding the alleged demand of ornaments either by her husband or in-laws. 14) It is, thus, evident from a bare perusal of their statements that none of them have supported the alleged allegation of demand of ornaments. Therefore, in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence led by the prosecution, it is difficult to hold that the respondent was in any manner involved in connection with the alleged crime. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, has, therefore, not committed any illegality in 6 acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 15) In view of the aforesaid background, we do not find any substance in this appeal. The appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. -Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge -Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Chandrakant