CHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/accused has directed this appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.12.1999 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T. No. 698/92, convicted him under Section 498A and 306 of IPC for RI one year with fine of Rs. 200/-, in earlier section while RI three years with fine of Rs. 300/- in later. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the deceased Leelabai got married with the appellant on 24.6.1988. As alleged subsequent to marriage in matrimonial home Leelabai was subjected to beating in regular course under the influence of liquor by the appellant. She was used to ask by the appellant to bring Rs. 20,000/- in dowry from her parental family. On 6.6.1992 in the morning the appellant under the influence of the liquor carried out beating of his wife Leelabai by means of kicks and fists, consequently she got ill and was admitted in the hospital by her brother-in-law Ganesh. On receiving such information at the Police Station, a preliminary inquiry was held in which it was known that she had consumed some poisonous substance but was not found fit to give her statement so the same was not recorded. Later in the late night during treatment she passed away, on which an inquest intimation was registered, in it's inquiry after preparing the dead body Panchnama, her corpus was sent to the hospital for autopsy. The same was carried out by Dr. A. K. Yadu, (P.W.12). According to postmortem report (Ex.P.9), no definite opinion regarding her cause of death was given by the doctor, however viscera was preserved for chemical examination and the same was sent to the FSL Sagar. On establishing some prima-facie circumstances of the offence the crime was registered and the same was investigated. On completion of the same the appellant was charge sheeted for the offence of Section 306 and 498A of IPC.

(2.) After committing the case to the Sessions Court initially the charge of Section 304B of IPC was framed against the appellant subsequently on 15.1.1998 the same was modified and the charge of Section 498A and 306 in alternate 304B of IPC were framed against the appellant, he abjured the guilt, on which the trial was held. After recording the evidence on appreciation holding the appellant guilty for the offence of Section 498A and 306 of IPC he was punished with the above mentioned punishment while he was acquitted from the charge of Section 304B of IPC. Being dissatisfied with such conviction and sentence the appellant has come to this Court with this appeal.

(3.) Appellant's counsel Shri R.S. Patel, after taking me through the record without challenging the impugned conviction of the appellant under Section 498A of IPC assailed the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 306 of IPC. In this regard he argued that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the exact cause and nature of death of the deceased Leelabai whether her death was homicidal, suicidal or in any case was accidental. In this connection by referring the deposition of aforesaid Dr. A.K. Yadu (P.W.12), who carried out the autopsy and prepared postmortem report (Ex.P.9) of the deceased, argued that such doctor has specifically stated in the postmortem report as well as in his deposition that he could not find out the exact cause and nature of death of Leelabai, however her viscera was preserved to rule out the possibility of her death due to consuming any poisonous substance. In this regard he further argued that although preserved viscera of the deceased was sent to FSL for it's chemical examination but it's report had neither produced nor proved on record and in the lack of such report there was no occasion with the trial Court to draw the inference that Leelabai by consuming some poisonous substance committed the suicide. In the lack of material and admissible evidence showing that Leelabai died with suicidal or unnatural death, it could not be assumed that she was abated by the appellant to commit suicide and in such premises prayed for setting aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 306 of IPC. Besides this he also argued that considering the long pendency of the present matter in which the appellant has suffered the mental agony of it for years together along with the judicial custody of 56 days during trial between 11.6.1992 to 7.8.1992, by adopting the lenient view his awarded jail sentence under Section 498A of IPC be reduced up to the aforesaid period for which he has already undergone by enhancing the amount of fine under the discretion of the Court and prayed to allow this appeal accordingly.