1 2025:CGHC:55113 The date when the judgment is reserved The date when the judgment is pronounced The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website Operative Full - - 12-11-2025 13-11-2025 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 161 of 2003 Umesh Chandra S/o Gangaram, age 32 years, R/o Village Nagpur, Distt. Baliya, Uttar Pradesh, Present Address – Minus Colony, Vishrampur, Quarter No.20, PS Vishrampur, Distt. Surguja (CG) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh through PS Vishrampur. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. KPS Gandhi, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, J Judgment On Board 12-11-2025 The appellant in this appeal is calling in question the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 9.1.2003 passed by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Surajpur, Surguja in ST No.231/99 whereby the appellant stands convicted under 2 Section 498A of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years, pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to suffer additional RI for one month. 02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that marriage of the appellant was solemnized with the deceased Anita Bai on 18.2.1992. The appellant is a resident of Nagpur, Baliya (Uttar Pradesh) but as he could not get any employment there, after marriage he started living in Vishrampur with his wife/deceased at her parental house and was working in Anubhav Electronics. He used to quarrel with his wife and in-laws after consuming liquor. On 9.2.1999 after quarelling with his wife and mother-in-law he ran away from the house. Being fed up with this conduct of the accused/appellant, on 12.2.1999 his wife Anita committed suicide by hanging herself leaving behind a suicide note. On report being lodged, offence under Section 306 of IPC was registered against the accused/appellant. 03. Learned trial Court framed charge under Section 306 of IPC against the accused which was abjured by him and he prayed for trial. In order to substantiate its case the prosecution examined 07 witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. 04. After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court 3 while acquitting the accused of the charge under Section 306 of IPC, convicted and sentenced him u/s 498A of IPC as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 05. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the material available on record. Learned trial Court ought to have seen that there is hardly any reliable evidence on record to warrant conviction of the appellant even under section 498A of IPC. All the material witnesses examined by the prosecution are close relations of the deceased and as such interested witnesses. There are material discrepancies in the statements of mother-in-law and father-in-law of the appellant which makes their statements not worth reliance. In fact, the deceased committed suicide on her own and there was no instigation or abetment by the appellant, therefore, the learned trial court acquitted him of the charge u/s 306 of IPC, however, it has fallen into error in holding him guilty u/s 498A of IPC as the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he harassed or tortured the deceased or subjected her to cruelty in connection with dowry. Therefore, the appellant deserves to be acquitted of the said charge by giving him benefit of doubt. Alternatively, he submits that if this Court ultimately upholds the conviction of the appellant u/s 498A of IPC, then considering the fact that the appeal is pending since 2003, the appellant was 32 years of age at that time and at present more than 55 of years; he was on bail 4 during trial and pendency of this appeal and never misused the liberty; he has remained in jail for about four months; he may be sentenced to the period already undergone. 06. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposing the contention of the appellants submits that learned trial Court upon minute appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant by the impugned judgment which calls for no interference by this Court. Therefore, the present appeal being without any substance is liable to be dismissed. 07. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 08. It is clear from the record of learned trial Court that the appellant was charged under Section 306 of IPC and after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, learned trial Court acquitted him of the said charge and convicted and sentenced him u/s 498A of IPC as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. 09. It is an admitted position in this case that deceased Anita Bai was wife of the accused/appellant and she committed suicide by hanging herself. Dr. Pawan Kumar Sharma (PW-1) conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased and opined that cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging and the death was suicidal in 5 nature vide his report of Ex.P/1. He remained firm on this in the cross- examination. 10. PW-3 Harendra Prasad, uncle of the deceased, states that the accused/appellant often used to quarrel with the deceased, as such she would remain sad; the accused would consume excessive liquor and quarrel with her thereafter. He states that three days before her committing suicide, the accused had a quarrel with her, he wanted to go back to his home with his belongings, however, he was prevented by persuasion but next day he left the in-laws’ house with his belongings. Two days thereafter Anita committed suicide. He states that in her suicide note she wrote that she being fed up with her husband is committing suicide of her own. 11. PW-4 Shambhunath, father of the deceased, also states that the accused/appellant used to quarrel with the deceased; he used to consume liquor; on 9.2.1999 he was leaving his house but persuaded and he left the house on 10.2.1999 and just two days thereafter Anita committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note (Ex.P/4). Similar is the statement of PW-5 Smt. Sheela Devi, mother of the deceased. PW-6 Anup Kumar Patnaik states that the accused was residing at her in- laws’ house and would quarrel and beat his wife Anita after consuming liquor. Being fed up with this ill-treatment, Anita committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note (Ex.P/4) which was seized as per seizure memo Ex.P/3 which bears his signature from C to C part. 6 12. In order to convict a person under Section 498A of the IPC, it must be proven that a married woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. Cruelty includes willful conduct that drives her to suicide, causes grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or health, or involves harassment with a view to coercing her to meet an unlawful demand for property. Evidence can include medical reports, witness testimony, and other documents that establish the link between the cruelty and the actions of the accused. Section 498A of IPC reads as under: “498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation- For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means- (a) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.]” 7 13. In the case in hand, mother, father, uncle and other witnesses have categorically stated that the accused/appellant used to consume liquor excessively, thereafter quarrel with the deceased and even beat her. Just three days before the incident the accused had a quarrel with the deceased; he was bent upon deserting her and going back to his house but was somehow persuaded. However, next day he left the house with his belongings and two days thereafter, Anita committed suicide by hanging herself leaving behind a suicide note which reads as under: “eSa tk jgh gwWa viuh ethZ ls blesas fdlh dk dksbZ gkFk ughsa gS A esjs eka cki fdlh dk dksbZ xyrh ughsa gS A eSa vius ifr ls rax vk dj ;s lc dj jgh gwWa esjs rhuksa cPpksa dks esjs ifr dks ns fn;k tk;sA vfurk” 14. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the manner in which the incident took place, the oral and documentary evidence available on record coupled with the conduct of the accused/appellant, it is crystal clear that Anita Bai, wife of the appellant, committed suicide by hanging on account of ill-treatment and quarrelsome behaviour of the accused. Being so, the learned trial Court while acquitting the accused of the charge u/s 306 of IPC, rightly held him guilty u/s 498A of IPC, which needs no interference by this Court. 15. As regards sentence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the incident took place in 1999; the appeal is 8 pending since 2003; at that time appellant was 32 years of age and at present about 55 years; he was on bail during trial as also during pendency of this appeal and did not misuse the liberty; he has remained in jail for about four months, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be served if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him while keeping the fine imposed on him with default sentence by trial Court intact. 16. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining conviction of the appellant under Section 498A of IPC, his substantive jail sentence is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, the fine imposed on him with default stipulation by trial Court shall remain intact. The impugned judgment stands modified to the above extent. The appellant is reported to be on bail, therefore, in view of provisions of Section 481 of BNSS, 2023, his bail bonds shall remain in operation for a period of six months from today. The record of the trial Court along with copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/ (Rajani Dubey) Judge Khan MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Digitally signed by MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Date: 2025.11.13 16:15:13 +0530