1 2025:CGHC:26472 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 294 of 2023 Kamta Ram Sahu S/o Shri Dhanuk Ram Sahu, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Maditarai, P.S. Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Dongarhgarh, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Mohan Verma S/o Pannalal Verma, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Maditarai, P.S. Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents For Appellant : Shri Aniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri S.S. Baghel, Advocate. For State/Respondent No.1 : Shri Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.2 : Shri Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Judgment On Board 20.06.2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/father of the victim under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 18.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG) in Sessions Trial No.12/2020, whereby, the respondent No.2-Mohan Verma has been acquitted with regard to the NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2025.06.20 19:47:11 +0530 2 offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that a merg intimation (Ex.P/14) was lodged by one Raju Dakha before the Police Station Dongargarh stating therein that the deceased, namely, Seema Sahu was brought to the Government Hospital, Dongargarh in serious condition and, was, died. Based upon the said information and upon its inquiry, an FIR (Ex.P/16) was registered on 24.11.2019 against the said respondent for the commission of offence under Section 306 of IPC in connection with Crime No.646/2019 alleging therein that the deceased has committed suicide because she was in love affair with the respondent-Mohan Verma, who has, however, refused to marry with her. Inquest of the dead body was conducted vide Ex.P/5 and was sent for autopsy, which was conducted by Dr. Suchita Shrivastava (PW-2) and opined vide her report (Ex.P/17) the cause of death of her to be cardio-respiratory arrest, which occurred due to poisoning. During the course of investigation,a letter marked as Article A-1, was seized from the uncle of the deceased, namely, Dilip Kumar Sahu (PW-4) on 18.11.2019 vide Ex.P/6 in presence of two witnesses, namely, Dulesh Kumar Sahu (PW-16) and Bhupendra Kumar Sahu (PW-6) and after recording the statements of the relatives of the deceased and after completion of usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon with regard to the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC and the matter was thereafter committed to the concerned trial Court, where the charge mentioned herein-above has been framed, which was denied by him and claimed to be tried. 3. In order to bring home the guilt of the said respondent, the prosecution 3 has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 20 documents, while none was examined by the said respondent in his defence. 4. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that the respondent is not involved in connection with the alleged crime and accordingly, he has been acquitted from the commission of the alleged crime and, being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred by father of the deceased. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the finding recorded by the trial Court holding that the respondent No.2-Mohan Verma is 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, particularly the statement of relatives of the deceased have not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting him, as such. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the learned trial Court. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 8. The respondent No.2-Mohan Verma has been charge-sheeted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC with regard to the incident occurred on 16.11.2019 at about 04.00 P.M., when the deceased has committed suicide by consuming poison. According to the prosecution, the deceased had love affair with the respondent No.2-Mohan Verma for the period over more than 1½ years 4 and she wanted to marry with him, but, he refused to marry, owing to which, she has committed suicide by consuming poison. 9. In order to establish the alleged allegation that the deceased has committed suicide, because of refusal of respondent No.2 to marry with her, father of the deceased, namely, Kamta Ram Sahu was examined as PW-3 and according to his evidence, particularly paragraph 4, would reveal the fact that he was, in fact, not aware that his daughter wanted to marry with the said respondent, nor his daughter has informed him that she wanted to marry with said Mohan Verma. Dilip Kumar Sahu (PW-4) was the uncle of the deceased, Bhupendra Kumar Sahu (PW- 6) was her cousin and Nirmala Sahu (PW-9), who was her mother, but they have not stated anywhere that she has committed suicide, because the said respondent has refused to marry with her. Rahul Sahu (PW-7) was the real brother of the deceased and, it appears from his testimony that he was, in fact, not aware regarding the relation of his sister with the said respondent. Insofar as the alleged letter (Article- A1) seized from the uncle of the deceased Dilip Kumar Sahu (PW-4) is concerned, it appears from a bare perusal of it that no allegation, as such, was mentioned against the said respondent. 10. From perusal of the aforesaid evidence and the letter (Article A-1), it, thus, appears that the alleged allegation that the deceased has committed suicide, because the said respondent has refused to marry with her, was, however, not found to be proved. The prosecution has, thus, failed to produce any congent and reliable evidence, so as to hold that the respondent No.2-Mohan Verma was in any manner involved in connection with the alleged crime, as alleged by the prosecution and 5 the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondent No.2-Mohan Verma from commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 11. The appeal being devoid of merit, is accordingly, dismissed. SD/- dSd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE Kamde