State Of Chhattisgarh vs Anil Kumar Dahre
2022 Latest Caselaw 4090 Chatt

                                 - 1-




                                                            NAFR

      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                       CRMP No. 932 of 2022

   • State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Station House Officer,
     Police Station Arjuni, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

                                                    ---- Applicant

                             Versus

  1. Anil Kumar Dahre S/o Late Tejram Dahre Aged About 26
      Years Resident of Village Tendukonha, Police Station Arjuni ,
      District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

  2. Smt. Kumari Bai Dahre W/o Late Tejram Dahre Aged About
      45 Years Resident of Village Tendukonha, Police Station
      Arjuni, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

                                               ---- Respondents


For Applicant         : Shri Sudeep Verma, Dy. Govt.
                        Advocate/applicant



         Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and

          Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput


                      ORDER ON BOARD

                          (28/06/2022)

Sachin Singh Rajput, J.

1. Heard on the application for grant of leave to appeal under

Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. This application has been filed by the applicant against the

judgment of acquittal dated 16/02/2022, passed in Session

Trial No.60/2019, by the Court of learned Additional

- 2-

Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), District Dhamtari (C.G.), by which

the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondents for an

offence punishable under Section 498 (A), 307 read with 34

of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC').

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the respondents

were charged under Sections 498 (A), 307 read with 34 of

IPC that on 29/08/2019 they administer poison by pesticide

on the victim/Smt. Girja Bai. Further case of the prosecution

is that the marriage of the victim and the respondent No. 1

was solemnized about two years back, thereafter the victim

is subjected to physical and mental cruelty. After due

investigation, the charge-sheet was filed and after committal

of the case the same was being tried by the learned trial

Court. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses in order to

prove the guilt and exhibited as many as 14 documents. The

learned trial Court appreciation of evidence came to a

conclusion that the prosecution was unable to prove the guilt

of the respondents herein and acquitted the respondents for

charges under Sections 498(A)/34 and 307/34 of IPC.

4. Shri Verma, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the

State/applicant submitted that the learned trial Court failed to

appreciate the evidence to its proper perspective and was

not justified in acquitting the respondents for the aforesaid

offences. The learned trial Court failed to see the testimony

- 3-

of the prosecution witnesses particularly Dhanraj Tonde

(PW-1) and victim Smt. Girjabai Dahre (PW-9), therefore,

the leave may kindly be granted under Section 378 (3) of

Cr.P.C.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant/State and

considering the submissions as well as the records available

and the impugned judgment with utmost circumspection.

6. Learned trial Court in paragraph 37 and 38 of impugned

judgment clearly held that treatment of victim (PW-9) was

done by Dr. Graham and Dr. Graham was not examined to

prove the treatment of the victim. The learned trial Court

also came to a conclusion that Forensic Science Laboratory

report with regard to nature of the poison is also not on

record, therefore, the fact with regard to pesticide being

poisonous and dangerous to human life is not proved by

evidence.

7. It is to be seen here that though the box of the pesticide was

recovered, however, the same was not send for forensic

examination to prove that it contained poisonous substance.

8. Learned trial Court on the basis of appreciation of entire

evidence in paragraph 48 of the impugned judgment,

particularly the evidence of victim (PW-9) came to a

conclusion that the prosecution was unable to prove that the

- 4-

victim was subjected to physical and mental cruelty and was

administered pesticide with an intention to kill her and

therefore acquitted the respondents for the aforesaid

offences.

9. After careful examination and the material available on

record, we find it difficult to take a different view from the

view already been taken by the learned trial Court.

Therefore, the applicant/State has not been able to make

out a case for grant of leave to appeal under Section 378 (3)

of CrPC. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to

and is hereby dismissed.

                  Sd/-                                Sd/-

          (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                (Sachin Singh Rajput)
               Judge                                Judge



Kamde