Nafr High Court
Case Details
SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.06.11 11:12:02 +0530 1 2025:CGHC:22811-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 91 of 2017 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- District Magistrate, Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. versus ... Appellant Parmeshwar Verma S/o Punaram Verma Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Baherakala (Ghivri), Police Station And District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Appellant/State For Respondent : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Sachhidanand Yadav, Panel Lawyer Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Judgment on Board. 10.06.2025 Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 16.11.2016 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bemetara, District Bemetara(CG) in Sessions Case 2 No.96/2015, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the victim, namely, Dulari Bai, who is the wife of the respondent/accused, was residing in a separate room of the house of her husband along with her daughter- Kavita and son- Nikhil in village Baherakala. It is alleged by the prosecution that on the date of incident, i.e. on 04.08.2015, in the morning, the Complainant- Dulari Bai was cleaning the Varandah of her house and her daughter- Kavita was also present there and at that particular time, her husband, the accused/respondent, was also present in his room. Further prosecution story is that at about 09.30 am, said Dulari Bai told her daughter, namely, Kavita for cleaning the cow dung of the Kotha, owing to which, her husband got annoyed and came out from his room holding a sickle and with an intention to kill her, attacked upon her, as a result of which, the stomach of her got injured and intestines of her came out and, thereafter she rushed to the house of her aunt, namely, Dauna Bai and informed her about the incident. She was thereafter, sent to the Hospital for her treatment and was examined by Dr. Anamika Minj (PW-12). 3. On account of the occurrence of alleged incident, her brother, namely, Paramu Verma has lodged the report before the Police Station, Bemetara, who in turn, after investigating the matter submitted the charge-sheet before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bemetara in connection with Crime No. 434/2015 against the respondent with 3 regard to the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and the matter was thereafter, committed to learned Sessions Judge, Bemetara, where the respondent was charged with the said offence and the charge so framed was denied by him and claimed to be tried. 4. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused/respondent, the prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses and has exhibited 22 documents, while none was examined by the respondent in his defence. 5. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, particularly the statement of the victim as well as her daughter, namely, Kavita, arrived at a conclusion that the respondent has been implicated falsely and accordingly, he has been acquitted with regard to the alleged offence mentioned herein-above and being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/State submits that the finding of the trial Court holding that the respondent is not involved in connection with the alleged crime, is apparently contrary to the materials available on record, inasmuch as, the evidence led by the victim (PW-3) and her daughter, namely, Kavita (PW-1), has not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent while referring to the statement of daughter- Kavita, who was the eye- 4 witness, submits that the statement of the victim has not been corroborated by her testimony, therefore, the trial Court while placing reliance upon her statement, has not erred in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime. 8. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 9. From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent- Parmeshwar Verma, who was the husband of the victim- Dulari Bai was charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC in connection with Crime No.434/2015 on account of the incident occurred on 04.08.2015 at 9.30 am. According to the statement of the victim- Dulari Bai (PW-3), she was attacked by her husband/ accused with the aid of sickle when she told her daughter to clean the cow dung of the Kotha. She was examined by Dr. Anamika Minj (PW-12), who has submitted the MLC report (Ex. P-13) of her and according to the said report, it appears that the abdominal internal organ has came out and she (Dulari Bai) was referred to the Mekahara Hospital at Raipur. Perusal of her (PW-12) statement, particularly paragraph 5, would show that the condition of her (Dulari Bai) was not serious in nature and was in a position to talk, nor blood was oozing because of the alleged injury and stated further that the alleged injuries were tied by clothes in order to stop oozing of the blood from her stomach. She stated further that looking to the injuries sustained by her, if the treatment would not have been given in proper time, it would 5 certainly be lead to a serious one. Although, the victim (Dulari Bai) has sustained the injuries on account of the alleged incident, but it is to be seen as to whether it was caused by her husband with an intention to kill her. 10. In order to establish the alleged allegations, said Dulari Bai was examined as PW-3 and it appears from her statement that on the said fateful day, when she asked her daughter- Kavita to clean the cow dung from the Kotha, then her husband while abusing her, assaulted on her stomach with the aid of sickle. It is stated further by her that she and her daughter both have bitten the hand of the respondent in order to save themselves and, thereafter ran away towards the lane. 11. It is now to be seen as to whether her statement is corroborated by her daughter, namely, Kavita (PW-1) or not, as she was present at that particular time. It, however, appears from a bare perusal of her (Kavita- PW-1) statement that she was, in fact, asked by her father(respondent) to clean the cow dung from the Kotha and when she was cleaning, she was stopped by her mother and then the respondent told her why are you stopping her, a quarrel then took place between them and, it reveals further from her testimony that her mother came with a sickle and during the course of scuffle, the alleged injury was caused to her abdomen. It appears further from her cross-examination, particularly paragraph 4, that she was attacked by her mother with the aid of sickle and when her father has intercepted, she then sustained the alleged injuries with the sickle. That apart, it reveals from the statement of said 6 Dulari Bai that she has bitten the hand of her husband, however, the MLC of him was not done for the resasons best known to the prosecution. The statement of her was, thus, not found to be corroborated by her own statement as well as by the statement of her minor daughter- Kavita, so as to hold that on the fateful day, she was attacked by her husband with an intention to kill her. In such circumstances, the trial Court while taking note of the statement of the daughter, an eye-witness, has not erred in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime. 12. Consequently, the appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge sunita