1 2025:CGHC:9294-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3423 of 2024 State of Chhattisgarh, through the Station House Officer, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Haresh Verma S/o Mahipal Verma, aged about 29 years R/o Konka, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Amrit Bai W/o Mahipal Verma, aged about 52 years R/o Konka, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Mahipal Verma S/o Aalen Verma aged about 61 years R/o Konka, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For State/Applicant : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 2 4 .0 2 .202 5 1. I.A. No. 01 of 2024, is an application for condonation of delay of 570 days in filing the appeal. 2. As the cause shown in the application is found to be sufficient, the same allowed. Delay in filing the application is hereby condoned. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Date: 2025.02.24 18:04:44 +0530 2 3. The State has sought leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 25.01.2023 passed in Sessions Case No. 207/2021 by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), District Durg (C.G.) whereby the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondents from offence punishable under Sections 498A, 34 & 304B of the IPC in connection with Crime No. 48/2021, registered at Police Station Dhamdha, District – Durg (C.G.) holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. 4. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on the morgue of the complainant Yashpal Verma (PW-03) before the Police Station Dhamdha as registered Case No. 05/2021 and investigated the matter. During the investigation, the statements of the deceased's maternal family members were recorded. The complainant's side has filed a complaint against the accused/respondents to the effect that the deceased Kavita Verma was married to Haresh Verma, resident of Village Konka, according to social customs. The deceased was harassed for money by her husband Haresh since marriage. When the deceased was harassed by beating her, the deceased used to tell her mother about the incident over the phone and when she came to her maternal home. The deceased had also told her mother Uttara Verma that whenever her husband used to harass and beat her mentally and physically by demanding money on the pretext of getting her treated at her maternal home, her Mother-in-Law and Father-in-Law used to take the side of their son and justify him and 3 the accused/respondent No.1 used to harass the deceased mentally by saying bad things to her. Whenever accused/respondent No. 1 has used to harassed for money and other things her mother-in-law and father-in-law always supported their son. Due to which the deceased fed up with the harassment of the accused /respondents committed suicide by hanging herself. 5. On the basis of aforesaid written complaint, FIR Ex.P.-41 was registered against the accused/respondents, the deceased was medically examined by PW-11 Dr. Rachna Agrawal in his opinion that the death of the deceased due to cardio respiratory arrest due to asphyxia caused by hanging and the nature of death was ante mortem vide its report Ex.P. 31. The statements of witnesses were recorded and after completing the investigation the charge sheet was filed before the concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate. 6. The charge was framed against the accused/respondents under Sections 498A, 34 & 304B of I.P.C. The accused respondents adjured the guilt. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as may as 15 witnesses and exhibited 53 documents in its favour. 7. After appreciating the evidences on record, the learned trial Court did not believe the evidence proving guilt of the accused respondents, and therefore, acquitted the accused respondents from the offence charged vide impugned judgment dated 25.01.2023 hence, present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking leave to appeal. 4 8. Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the applicant/State would submit that the learned trail Court has erred by acquitting the respondents from the offence charged by discarding the evidence of prosecution witnesses without there being any strong reason to discard their evidences. He further submitted that the learned trial Court has failed to realize that the prosecution tendered sufficient evidence for proving the guilt of the accused/respondents and the charge under Sections 498A, 34 & 304B of IPC was proved beyond any reasonable doubt. The learned trial Court has also failed to consider the evidence of complainant PW-3, who has clearly stated that the incident took place on 24.12.2021, he was attending a Ramayan competition in his village Sandi at about 9 to 9.30 am. At the same time, Uttra Verma, mother of the deceased, called him from her house and told him that she had received a call from deceased Kavita that her husband was beating her for dowry. The complainant has further stated that when she expressed inability of her parents in meeting the said demand, the accused/respondents used to abuse and assault the complainant. The statements of PW-3 has been corroborated by PW-4, Roopa Verma, who is maternal aunt of the deceased. The said witnesses have affirmed the allegation of harassment and cruelty by the accused/respondents in connection with demand of dowry. He also submitted that the allegations against the accused/respondents have further been affirmed by the statements of PW-5, Uttra Verma, who is mother of the deceased and PW-6, 5 Ashok Verma, who is maternal uncle of the deceased. The finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court is erroneous and contrary to evidence on the record and therefore, the same deserves to be set aside. 9. We have heard learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the applicant/State and perused the record of the case including the impugned judgment of acquittal. 10. The first question for consideration would be, whether the trial Court was justified in holding that death of deceased Kavita Verma was antemortem in nature ? 11. The trial Court relying upon the statement of Dr. Rachna Agrawal (PW-11), who has conducted postmortem over the body of deceased Kavita Verma vide Ex.P-31, has opined that cause of death was cardio-respiratory arrest /asphyxia due to hanging and nature of death was antemortem in nature. The said finding recorded by the trial Court is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to record. Even otherwise, it has not been seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant. We hereby affirm the said finding. 12. Secondly, the question that needs consideration is whether the accused, being the relatives of the deceased Kavita Verma, her husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law, assaulted her to bring money from her maternal home and harassed her mentally and physically and created such circumstances as a result of which she was instigated to commit suicide and on 24.01.2021 by hanging, in 6 this way the dowry death of the deceased was caused by the accused? 13. In this regard, deceased Kavita's maternal uncle witness Chetan Verma (PW-01) has stated in his main examination that on 24.01.2021, his brother's daughter-in-law Rupa Verma called him and he was told that her niece Kavita's father-in-law had called and he was saying that niece Kavita is serious, you all should come quickly. After receiving the call, he went to his niece Kavita's in-laws' village Konka, then his niece's father-in-law told him that Kavita had hanged herself from the fan. But they suspected that his niece had been killed by her in-laws. On being asked indicative questions, this witness has accepted that about a year before the incident, her niece's husband Harish Verma, her father-in-law Mahipal Verma, her maternal uncle-in-law Amar, and her maternal uncle-in-law Devnath had come to his village Sandi and said that her niece Kavita cannot come to their house because she does not work and had asked to keep her niece Kavita at their house. Then those people somehow convinced them with the help of prominent people of the village and sent them to village Konka. This witness has also accepted that on 24.11.2020, accused Haresh had come to village Sandi with his niece Kavita for the funeral ceremony of his father. At that time, accused Haresh had abused his mother-in-law and demanded money in the name of his niece's treatment. But the witness has clearly accepted in paragraph 14 of his cross-examination that in front of him, accused Haresh had not asked for money from his 7 sister (mother of the deceased) for the treatment of the deceased. He has also accepted that if his niece had committed suicide due to being upset due to illness, then he cannot tell about it. Thus, the statement of this witness is completely contradictory and does not appear to be reliable. 14. The maternal uncle of the deceased Kavita Verma, witness Rakesh Kumar Nishad (PW-2) has admitted in paragraph 05 of his cross- examination that the accused Haresh used to take his wife Kavita Verma to the hospital for treatment. The accused and his wife Kavita Verma had a cordial relationship with each other. It is also accepted that Kavita Verma's health was always bad due to which she was upset, Kavita Verma committed suicide due to poor health. 15. Yashpal Verma (PW-03) has stated that the incident took place on 24.01.2021. He was attending a Ramayan competition in his village Sandi at around 9 to 9.30 in the morning. At the same time, Uttara, mother of the deceased Kavita, called him from her house and told him that she had received a call from Kavita that her husband, accused Haresh, was beating her. But this witness has not stated that the accused was beating the deceased in any way for dowry demand. 16. Rupa Verma (PW-04), who is the maternal aunt of the deceased Kavita, has stated in paragraph 01 of her main examination that on 24.01.2021 at around 9 am, when Kavita talked to her mother on mobile, he also talked to Kavita, Kavita had told on phone that her husband Haresh and her in-laws beat her. But this witness also did 8 not make this statement in her main examination that the accused had beaten her for dowry. 17. Smt. Uttara Verma (PW 05) has stated that on 24.01.2021 at about 09 am, her daughter Kavita told her on mobile phone that the accused were beating her and she should come quickly. But this witness has also not stated anything in this regard that the deceased Kavita had told her about the accused beating Kavita Verma for demanding dowry. 18. Mrs. Narmadiya Bai (PW9) has not supported the case of the prosecution. This witness has admitted in the second line of paragraph 07 of her cross-examination that her daughter lives in a joint family, which includes the accused. The entire family lives happily. Accused Haresh used to take his wife Kavita to hospitals in Dhamdha, Durg and Rajnandgaon for treatment. Kavita used to say that she did not feel like working because she was physically ill. The deceased used to be in a lot of pain due to her physical illness. 19. Thus, from perusal of the aforementioned evidence presented by the prosecution in support of its case it transpires that the prosecution has failed to prove that being the relatives of the deceased Kavita Verma, her husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law, assaulted her to bring money from her maternal home and harassed her mentally and physically and created such circumstances as a result of which she was instigated to commit suicide and on 24.01.2021 by hanging, in this way the dowry death of the deceased was caused by the accused. 9 20. Taking into consideration the findings recorded by the learned trial Court, acquitting the accused/respondents from aforesaid offences, we do not find any reason to allow Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking grant of leave to appeal. 21. Recently, applying the law governing the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "State of Rajasthan Vs. Kistoora Ram" reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 984, has held as follows:- "8. The scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal is very limited. Unless it is found that the view taken by the Court is impossible or perverse, it is not permissible to interfere with the finding of acquittal. Equally if two views are possible, it is not permissible to set aside an order of acquittal, merely because the Appellate Court finds the way of conviction to be more probable. The interference would be warranted only if the view taken is not possible at all." 22. Thus, for the foregoing reasons, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking for leave to appeal being totally devoid of merits the same is rejected. Consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra