2025:CGHC:10540 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Acq. A. No. 1034 of 2024 State of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. Bodhghat, District - Bastar (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus Shivdhar Das S/o. Ashrafi Das Aged About 50 Years R/o. Vrindavan Colony, Jagdalpur, P.S. Bodhghat, District - Bastar (C.G.) --- Respondent For Appellant : Shri H.A.P.S. Bhatia, P.L . For Respondent : Shri Samir Singh, Advocate along-with the respondent. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board 19/08/2025 1. The appellant / State has filed this appeal under section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) assailing the validity, correctness and judicial propriety of the judgment dated 24/11/2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (for short ‘JMFC’), Jagdalpur, District – Bastar in Criminal Case No. 1089/2018. 2. By the judgment impugned, trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent under section 304-A of IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution in nutshell is that, the respondent/accused has been tried for offences punishable under sections 304(A) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) under the charges that, on the date of incident appellant/accused in a negligence and ignorance manner dug septic tank and left open it without following safety measure, due to which the deceased drawn and her death caused due to drowning on 01.11.2017 at about 03:00 hours in Tiranga Chowk, Ambedkar Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (CG). ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.08.22 10:41:24 +0530 -2- 4. That, after due and necessary investigation the charge sheet was filed and the respondents/accused were put to face charges before the learned Trial Court. 5. That, having been so charged the respondents/accused adjured the guilt. In order to prove its case the prosecution examined as many as 07 witnesses in its favour. 6. That, after appreciating the evidences on record, the learned Trial Court did not believe the evidence proving guilt of the respondents/accused and therefore, acquitted them from the offence charged vide impugned judgment and order dated 24.11.2022. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant/State submits that finding of the acquittal recorded by the learned JMFC is illegal, improper and incorrect and liable to set aside. He further submits that the learned JMFC erred in acquitting the respondent from the offence charged. The learned JMFC has failed to appreciate the evidence in it’s prospective and scummed to surmises and conjunctures. Learned JMFC has failed to consider the statement of PW-3 - Ashok Dutta, the Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Jagdalpur. Therefore, the learned trial court further failed to appreciate the statement of witnesses namely – Jumari Keshar (PW-1), Balwant Das Raj (PW-2) and Rajesh Kumar Das (PW-5) who supported the case of the prosecution. Therefore, he submits that the impugned judgment may be set aside. The respondent may be convicted as charged and may be sentenced appropriately. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent support the judgment impugned and submits that prosecution who is not able to prove that the Septic Tank (pit) was constructed by the respondent. He further that there is no evidence on record that prior to date of incident i.e. 11/11/2017 any work order was issued by the Municipal Corporation, Jagdalpur for construction of such Septic Tank from the house of the deceased. He further submits that the learned JMFC on meticulous examination of the evidence available on record, recorded a finding of acquittal which may not be disturb in this appeal and appeal may be dismissed -3- 9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased – Smt. Nani Pochi Bai fell down in the Septic Tank (pit) in her house and died of drowning. Factum of her death by drowning in Septic Tank (pit) is found to be proved. The case of the prosecution is brought on the fact that the respondent was given the work order for construction of Septic Tank (pit) in the house of various beneficiaries in the Municipal Corporation in the area of Jagdalpur. Though, the prosecution witnesses who happens to be employee of Municipal Corporation have been examined and they have exhibited certain documents to demonstrate that work order was issued. But however, those work order are after the date of incident and not prior to the date of incidence and there is no eye-witnesses to the fact that how the deceased has fell down Septic Tank (pit). 11. The learned JMFC on assessment of evidence gave it’s finding in paragraph-10 is herein below:- “Now it has to be seen in the case whether the death of the deceased by falling into the septic tank pit was due to the negligence of the accused. Prosecution witnesses have stated in their statements that the Nagar Nigam was getting toilets constructed in houses, under which a toilet was being constructed in the house of deceased Nani Pochi Bai. Prosecution witness Ashok Dutta (PW-4) presented two work orders (Ex.P.-5 and Ex.P.-6) given by Executive Engineer Nagar Nigam - Pramod Sahu to contractor - Shri Shivdhar Das Ambedkar Ward No. 29 Jagdalpur. The said document was examined, which shows that accused Shivdhar Das was appointed on 22.11.17 and 26.11.16 to carry out the construction of private toilets in various wards of the city. In the work order dated 22.11.17, the time period for the work was fixed as two months and in the work order dated 26.11.16, the time period for the work was fixed as four months. In this case, it does not appear that the list of beneficiaries was provided along with the work order given to the accused Shivdhar Das contractor. According to the statement of the prosecution witnesses, the incident is dated 01.11.17. It does not appear that any work order was given to the accused before 01.11.17. In this case, it is evident from the evidence that the applicant Jumari Keshav did not make any complaint to the Municipal Corporation regarding the incomplete construction of the toilet tank. The -4- applicant has stated that the toilet of those people was built separately and the same toilet is also used by his mother, due to which the applicant's own statement raises a doubt whether the construction of the toilet was being done by the Municipal Corporation or was personal. In this case, the entire investigation of the case was done by Assistant Sub Inspector - J.S. Thakur but despite giving several opportunities to the said witness for cross-examination, he was not cross-examined due to his absence. Therefore, the charge against the accused is not proved beyond doubt as there is doubt in the commission of the crime due to the negligence and carelessness of the accused on the basis of evidence presented in the case.” 12. The finding recorded by the learned JMFC in the availability of the evidence, doesn’t appeared to be perverse and cannot be said to contrary to record. 13. Law with regard to powers of the Appellate Court against an order of acquittal is no longer res-Integra. 14. In the matter of Budh Singh vs. State of U.P. reported in (2006) 9 SCC 731, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in a matter of Appeal against acquittal, the High Court should not ordinarily set aside a judgment of acquittal in a case where two views are possible, although the view of the Appellate Court is a more probable one. However, while dealing with a judgment of acquittal, it is free to consider the entire evidences on record so as to arrive at a finding as to whether the views of the trial Court were perverse or otherwise unsustainable. It is also entitled to consider as to whether in arriving at a finding of fact, the trial Court has failed to take into consideration the admissible evidence and has taken into consideration evidences brought on record contrary to law. 15. Further, in the matter of V.N. Ratheesh vs. State of Kerala reported in (2006) 10 SCC 617, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that there is no embargo on the Appellate Court reviewing the evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based. Generally, the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by acquittal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court said that the golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other -5- to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. It is further held that the paramount consideration of the Court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less from the conviction of an innocent. In a case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon the appellate Court to re- appreciate the evidence where the accused has been acquitted for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether any of the accused really committed any offence or not. It was also observed that the principle to be followed by appellate Court considering the appeal against the judgment of acquittal is to interfere only when there are compelling and substantial reasons for doing so. If the impugned judgment is clearly unreasonable and convincing materials have been unjustifiably eliminated in the process, it is a compelling reason for interference 16. Thus, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the case laws cited above, this Court is of the opinion that there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court, which is a plausible one therefore, no interference is required to be made with the findings recorded by the said Court. 17. In light of above, the view taken by learned trial court appears to be a possible view and does not appear to be perverse or contrary to evidence. Therefore, appeal sans merits and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish