Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chintoo @ Omprakash Sen vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 13 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1631 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
CHINTOO @ OMPRAKASH SEN S/O NOKHE LAL SEN,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, BARGI COLONY BHONGA
MOHALLA,PS BARGI,JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI N.K. TIWARI-ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DISTT.JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MISS VIBHA PATHAK - PANEL LAWYER )
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374
(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 challenging the judgment
and sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial
No.32/2007, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 498-A of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of
Rs.1000/-. In default of fine, appellant is directed to further undergo 3 months
R.I..
The short facts of the case are that on 23.11.2006, appellant Chintu @
Omprakash lodged a report that his wife Smt. Vinita is missing from the house
and when he returned at 06:00-7:00 p.m., she was not there and he tried to
search her at all the possible place. On 26.11.2006, her dead body was found in
a well in a colony of Bargi, Jabalpur. After recording the statement of the
relatives of the deceased, Police Station-Bargi, Jabalpur registered the offence
against the present appellant under section 306 of the IPC vide crime
no.465/2006 and after investigation, the charge-sheet was filed.
During trial, Dr. R.P. Pyasi (PW-1), opined that the deceased was died
due to the drowning in a well. Daughter of the deceased, Kumari Rakhi (PW-3)
turned hostile and Rambai (PW-4), Jyoti (PW-5) and Bablu Kumar (PW-6)
have also turned hostile in respect of the allegation of cruelty or abetment to
commit suicide, however, Prem Rani Mother of the deceased stated that the
appellant was a habitual drinker and used to beat the deceased. Learned
Sessions Judge, Jabalpur after considering the evidence available on record by
the impugned judgment dated 28.07.2007 acquitted the appellant from the
offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC, however convicted him for
the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and sentenced
accordingly. During the trial, the appellant remained in custody from 10.12.2006
to 19.02.2007, total 71 days.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that
except the mother of the deceased, no other witnesses supported the case of
the prosecution. Mother of the deceased has also stated only in respect of
consumption of liquor by the appellant and there is no allegation in respect of
cruelty coupled with the demand of dowry or any amount, therefore, no offence
under Section 498-A of the IPC would be proved against the appellant. He
prayed for acquittal of the appellant.
Per contra, learned panel lawyer for the respondent/State supported the
judgment passed by the Sessions Court, Jabalpur and argued that due to the act
of the appellant, the deceased committed suicide and it also amounts to cruelty
even in the absence of demand of dowry. She prays for dismissal of the present
appeal.
After examining the record, it appears that the appellant has been
acquitted from the charges punishable under Section 306 of IPC, however, the
mother of the deceased proved that due to the misbehaviour of the appellant,
deceased committed suicide, which amounts to cruelty and, therefore, the
learned Sessions Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in
convicting the appellant for lesser offence under Section 498-A of the IPC. The
incident took place in the year, 2006 and the appellant was of 32 years at the
time of incident. The appellant remained in custody for 71 days. He is taking
care of the daughter of the deceased. There is no minimum sentence prescribed
in Section 498-A of IPC.
In view of the above, I deem it proper to reduce the sentence awarded to
the appellant, which has already undergone by him, however, the amount of fine
is enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.5,000/-. If the appellant will not deposit the
enhanced amount of fine within a period of one month from today, he will be
sent to jail for undergoing remaining jail sentence awarded by the Sessions
Court and he will not be entitled for the benefit granted by this Court.
Accordingly, this criminal appeal is partly allowed. The jail sentence
awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
(VINAY SARAF)
JUDGE
sh
