Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Kallu And Others on 25 July, 2019
Author: Ram Krishna Gautam
Bench: Ram Krishna Gautam
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 79 Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 6565 of 2003 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Kallu And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
This Government Appeal has been proposed against judgment of acquittal dated 23.09.2003, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 6, Banda, in Sessions Trial No. 402 of 1995, arising out of Case Crime No. 169 of 1995, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Girwan, District Banda, with this contention that trial Court failed to appreciate facts and law placed before it.
It was specifically written in report that in-laws of deceased were not satisfied with her and they committed murder of deceased. After investigation charge sheet for offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. was submitted and cognizance over same was taken. Trial was held for offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. Trial Court concluded with judgment of acquittal, whereas five witnesses of fact, fully intact, were examined and death within seven years of marriage under unnatural circumstances at nuptial house was there and accusation was instantly reported. Prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, even then, judgment of acquittal was passed. Hence, this appeal with request of grant of leave for filing this appeal.
Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the judgment.
From the very perusal of impugned judgment, it is apparent that first information report (Ext.Ka-1) was filed by PW-1 Krishna Dutt at Police Station Girwan with accusation of murder by accused persons. This was enquired by police and ultimately prima facie case punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. was held to be made out. Thereafter, case under Section 306 I.P.C. was got registered after a delay of about 12 days and investigation resulted submission of charge sheet for offence of abatement to commit suicide, resulting commission of suicide, punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. against husband Kallu and mother-in-law Smt. Ranno. Trial held for that offence, but all witnesses including complainant / informant was of firm stand that it was an offence of murder and no evidence for offence of abatement to commit suicide, thereby commission of suicide, was given by any of those five witnesses, whereas none of above witnesses were resident of place of occurrence or were having their personal knowledge about this occurrence, except the previous and subsequent conduct of accused persons said by it. But the medical testimony of inquest proceeding and autopsy examination was with conclusive opinion of death owing to anti mortem hanging resulting asphyxia and there was no other anti mortem injury over the person of deceased or any abnormality in any of internal organs of deceased. Autopsy examination report (Ext. Ka-10), proved by prosecution witness medical officer, was with specific mention of one anti mortem injury of ligature mark 28cm x 1cm encircling neck except 2cm on left side of neck. Mark is obliquely placed, high up in the neck above thyroid cartilage. Distance of ligature mark from left ear 2.5cm and from right ear 6cm. Groove is hard and dry on section hard, white glistening and parchment like. Except this, there was no anti mortem injury and any abnormality in internal organs and this was with conclusive finding of death owing to anti mortem hanging. Trial Judge has rightly concluded that it was anti mortem hanging i.e. suicide by deceased. Now, abatement to commit suicide, resulting in suicide, as is required for offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. was discussed by a trial Judge and it is a part on record that none of five witnesses of fact has ever said that there was abatement to commit suicide, resulting suicide of deceased, whereas defence by its evidence right from registration of case crime number has mentioned that Kallu was the eldest son of his parent and he being Karta of the family managed marriage of his younger sister and marriage of another younger sister was scheduled, for which some rituals were to be performed on the next day, but deceased was quarrelling for getting partition from joint family, which was not conceded by him, resulting this suicide by deceased and this was cogently proved up to the extent of creation of preponderance of probabilities. Trial Judge by appropriate appreciation of facts and evidence, placed before it, has concluded about failure of prosecution to prove charge beyond reasonable doubt and this was fully corroborated by evidence on record.
Apex Court in Bhim Singh Vs. State of Haryana; (2002) 10 SCC 461 has propounded that where finding for acquittal is palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or administratively unsustainable, then and then only appellate court should interfere in judgment of acquittal.
Apex Court in K. Prakashan v. P.K. Surenderan; 2008 (1) SCC 258 has propounded that appellate court should not reverse acquittal merely because another view is possible on evidence.
In present case even before trial Court while being examined as PW-1 to PW-5 including informant witnesses were of this contention that it was a case of murder, whereas medical evidence proved the case to be anti mortem hanging and suicide. Hence, once prosecution has not pleaded suicide, then question of abatement to commit suicide, resulting suicide, does not arise. Hence, the case of prosecution was utterly not accepted by prosecution witness of fact, because they were of firm contention about murder. Investigation and medical evidence was not corroborating. Hence, trial Court has rightly concluded with judgment of acquittal.
Under above facts and circumstances, there appears no perversity or infirmity, requiring grant of leave to appeal. The leave to appeal is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 NS