Baleshwar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 662 Chatt

                                                                            NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  CRA No. 1050 of 2016

   • Baleshwar S/o Baliram Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Garka, Police
     Station Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                     ---- Appellant

                                     Versus

   • State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Kondagaon,
     Chhattisgarh. Station House Officer, Police Station Keshkal, District
     Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                   ---- Respondent

For Appellant                 :            None.
For Respondent/State          :            Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A.



                Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

                             Judgment on Board
28/06/2021

1. By the impugned judgment dated 21/06/2016 passed in Sessions

Trial No. 63/2012 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Kondagaon (C.G.), the Appellant has been convicted for the offence

punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.

2. According to the case of prosecution, deceased Nandini Bai was wife

of the Appellant. Their marriage was solemnized in the year 2004,

allegedly, after 5-6 months of their marriage, the Appellant on account

of demand of dowry, ill-treated the deceased due to that on

19.09.2006, the deceased died in unnatural circumstances.

Thereafter, morgue report was lodged. On the basis of morgue report, offence has been registered against the Appellant. Later on statement

of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. After

completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. Trial Court

has framed the charges. To prove the guilt of the Appellant, the

prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. One defense

witness has been examined by the Appellant. Statement of the

Appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein he

has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter.

3. After trial, the Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the Appellant

as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

4. A certificate of incarceration sent by the Jail Superintendent, Central

Jail, Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) would mention that the Appellant

has undergone the entire jail sentence imposed upon him by the Trial

Court and already released from jail on 24.06.2020.

5. Since no one appears for the Appellant today, I decide this appeal on

merits.

6. I have heard Learned Counsel appearing for the State and perused

the record to assess the correctness of the impugned judgment of

conviction. I have also gone through the statements of the witnesses.

7. There is no dispute on the point that within seven years of marriage of

the deceased, she died in unnatural circumstances. According to the

opinion given by Autopsy Surgeon, the deceased was died by

consuming some poisonous substance. In their Court statement

Katharam (PW-10), father of the deceased supported the entire case

of prosecution. Janakram (PW-4) corroborated the statement of Katharam (PW-10). Both the above witnesses remain firmed during

their cross-examination. There is nothing on record on the basis of

which their statements can be disbelieved.

8. From the evidence available on record and looking to the entire case

of prosecution there is sufficient evidence available on record against

the Appellant and the crime has duly proved against him. Thus, the

learned Trial Court has rightly convicted the Appellant.

9. Consequently, the appeal has no merit and the same is liable to be

and is hereby dismissed.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Shubham