1 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 2025:CGHC:28242 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 457 of 2016 1 - Istaq @ Isteyaq S/o Sahabuddin Ansari Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Vijay Nagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Manoj Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 26/06/2025 1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C is against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20/01/2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 83/2011 by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.06.30 10:42:03 +0530 2 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 Conviction Sentence U/s 304 B of the IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. In this case, there were three accused persons i.e. husband (appellant herein), father-in-law and mother-in-law. However, the father-in-law and mother-in-law have been acquitted by the trial Court. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the father of the appellant namely Sahabuddin Ansari informed the police station- Ramanujganj that his daughter-in-law Mobina Khatun (since deceased) and son Istak were living separately from him. On 03.09.2010 at about 11:30, he went to Jama Masjid in the middle of the colony to offer Jumma with his son and Daughter-in-law Mobina Khatun was alone at home. When they returned home at about 05:00 PM, son Istak went inside the room and saw that his wife Mobina Khatun was hanging by tying a nylon rope around her neck. On the basis of inquest, FIR was registered and investigation was conducted. 3. During investigation, Spot Map (Ex.P/07) was prepared. Subsequently after completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted before the Court. After framing the charges against the accused/appellant, the charges were read out and explained to the appellant, he denied committing the crime and demanded trial. 4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses in its support. Statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein he has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter. 5. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence 3 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 available on record, by its judgment dated 20/01/2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the appellant has no intention to commit the offence and the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that merely on the strength of suspicion, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court. It was further argued by the counsel that at the time of incident, the appellant was not present there when the deceased committed suicide. Moreover, learned counsel further submits that the trial Court has not rightly appreciated the evidence on record and without there being any material against the appellant, he has been convicted. As such the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is liable to be set aside. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the submission of the appellant and submits that the conviction of the appellant is well merited which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection. 9. PW/1 Murtaz Ansari, father of the deceased in his statement stated that after two years of marriage of his daughter, his son-in-law (appellant) demanded fifty thousand rupees. He stated that his son-in-law used to beat his daughter with a stick and made her body black. He further stated that when he went to his daughter’s house, his daughter told him that 4 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 when you did not give money to your son-in-law, he came here and beat her badly. The accused and his parents used to say that when he could not fulfill the demand of money, take the girl back. He stated that the in-laws of his daughter time and again say that you take back the girl back, otherwise will kill her by administering poisoning or any other way. Thereafter, he got the news that his daughter had died. When the police reached there, the accused told that the girl had hanged herself yesterday. 10. Intaj Ansari (PW2) stated in his deposition that Murtaj is his brother and the deceased Mobina Khatoon was his niece. When Mobina got married, after some time, Appellant and his parents used to beat her. They used to tell her to bring fifty thousand rupees, otherwise they would not keep her with them and would kill her. Apart from fifty thousand rupees, he was asking for a car and a motor cycle. After that, in the year 2010, the girl committed suicide by hanging herself. A year before the incident, the accused and his father had come to his village, at that time they had demanded Rs. 50,000 and a motor cycle. His niece had also told that they had demanded Rs. 50,000 and a motor cycle from her and used to tell that if she did not give it, they would not keep her in the house and used to beat her. There were injury marks on her body. The accused had beaten the girl and after she died, hung her. 11. Dr. Ajay Tirkey (PW8) who has conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased has stated in his statement that in the external examination, the body was lying flat on the back, eyes were closed, tongue was sticking out. The sole of the foot was bent down, the veins of the face 5 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 were swollen with blood and the nails of both the hands were found to be blue, blue nylon rope was found deep around the neck. Hyoid bone was found fractured. Spleen was found ruptured. The Doctor gave detailed opinion about injuries, illness of the deceased, its duration and cause, has stated that she died within 3 to 4 hours of eating food. In his cross-examination, he has given his opinion that death was caused by asphyxia due to hanging and the death was homicidal in nature. Death had occurred within about 60 to 70 hours. 12. Upon cumulative analysis of evidence on record, I am of the view that this was a case of suicide committed by the deceased within 7 years of marriage on account of harassment meted out to her due to demand of dowry. So far as the conviction of the accused is concerned, it is admitted that he is the husband of the deceased and is responsible for safety and security of his wife but he has failed to perform his responsibility as husband and, therefore, his conviction under Section 304-B IPC is sustained. 13. Coming to the question of sentence, this Court finds that the trial Court has awarded rigorous imprisonment for 10 years to the accused appellant under Section 304-B IPC. Punishment under Section 304-B IPC varies from 7 years to life. When the court proceeds to award maximum permissible sentence for an offence, it is the cardinal principle of law that reasons have to be given for awarding such punishment. I do not find any such reasons to have been disclosed by the trial Court. This Court otherwise finds that there are no circumstances, which may justify awarding of such punishment to the accused appellant in the facts of the 6 / 6 CRA No. 457 of 2016 present case. Considering the evidence in its entirety, this Court is of the view that punishment of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304-B IPC to the accused appellant is not warranted, and ends of justice would be met if the sentence is reduced to 7 years RI. To that extent, this Court finds it appropriate to modify the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court. 14. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, ends of justice would be met if this Court orders that the substantive sentence of RI for 7 years is held sufficient. The incident occurred on 03/09/2010. The appellant arrested on 01/12/2010. The impugned judgment has been passed on 20/01/2016, after passing of the impugned order the appellant approached this Court and this Court by order dated 29/08/2016 suspended the sentence and released the appellant on bail. Thus, it is evident that the appellant has undergone the jail sentence of 05 years and 08 months. 15. Consequently, the Criminal Appeal is allowed in part. He is on bail. His bail bonds are cancelled and he is directed to surrender forthwith and/or be taken into custody for serving out the remaining period of sentence. 16. The trial court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. 17. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge $. Bhilwar/ Gowri