Sushil Kumar Sharma @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

This criminal leave to appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant seeking leave to file criminal appeal against the judgment dated 24.08.2017

passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Srikarnapur, District Sri Ganganagar (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the trial court’) in Sessions Case

No.07/2011 (CIS No.45/14), whereby it has acquitted accused-respondent No.2Ruchi Sharma for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC.

Brief facts of the case are that on 31.08.2010, PW-2 Sushil Kumar filed a complaint at Police Station Srikaranpur, District Sri Ganganagar with the

allegations that his brother-Ashwani had solemnized marriage to respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma around four years back and out of the said wedlock

one son also born. It was also alleged in the complaint that respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma is characterless and indulged in illegal profession and for

that they requested her to stop those activities but her family members always threatened his brother-Ashwani to lodge a dowry case against him. It

was also alleged that respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma used to taunt his brother-Ashwani while saying that if he want to die he may die but she would

carry on with these activities. It was also alleged that on 30.08.2010, respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma tortured his brother-Ashwani by making several

comments and his father-in-law also threatened him on telephone and on account of those threats his brother-Ashwani committed suicide on

30.08.2010.

On the aforesaid complaint of PW-2 Sushil Kumar, the Police Station Srikaranpur, District Sri Gangangar registered the FIR No.139/2010 for the

offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC against respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma and other persons viz. Vijay Kumar, Ramanand and Suchit

Gaur.

After investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma and other persons for the offence punishable under Section

306/34 IPC and the trial court also framed aforesaid charges against them.

In between, in a revision petition preferred on behalf of other accused persons viz. Vijay Kumar, Ramanand and Suchit Gaur before this Court, they

were discharged for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC by this Court and the trial against respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma continues.

The prosecution had produced as many as 11 witnesses and also produced several documents to prove the charge against respondent No.2-Ruchi

Sharma. The statements of respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein she has stated that statements of

prosecution witnesses are false, however, no evidence was produced in defence.

The trail court, after taking into consideration the ocular and documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, has acquitted accused respondent

No.2-Ruchi Sharma for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. Hence, this criminal leave to appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that from the Exhibit-P/8 i.e. suicide note, written by deceased-Ashwani himself, it is clearly proved

that respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma instigated deceased-Ashwani to commit suicide. It is also submitted that from the evidence of prosecution

witnesses viz. PW-1 Vijay Kumar Sharma, PW-2 Sushil Kumar and PW-3 Rohtash Kumar, the charge against accused-respondent No.2-Ruchi

Sharma is proved beyond doubt.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further argued that the trial court has not taken into consideration the evidence produced by the prosecution in

right perspective and grossly erred in acquitting accused respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC.

Learned counsel for the appellant has, therefore, prayed that it is a fit case wherein this criminal leave to appeal be granted to file criminal appeal

against the impugned judgment. Â

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned judgment passed by the trial court and argued that as a matter of fact, the

prosecution has failed to prove the charge against accused respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma and, therefore, the trial court has not committed any

illegality in acquitting accused respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma. It is also argued that the prosecution has not proved the fact that the Exhibit-P/8 i.e.

suicide note, was written by deceased-Ashwani himself and the evidence of prosecution witnesses viz. PW-1 Vijay Kumar Sharma, PW-2 Sushil

Kumar and PW-3 Rohtash Kumar is not sufficient to prove the charge against accused respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma for the offence punishable

under Section 306 IPC and, therefore, the trial court has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned judgment, whereby it has acquitted her

for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. Learned Public Prosecutor has, therefore, submitted that it is not a fit case to grant this criminal

leave to appeal to file criminal appeal against the impugned judgment.

Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and also gone through the record of the case, copy of which is supplied by the

learned counsel for the appellant.

After carefully going through the ocular as well as documentary evidence, I don’t find any illegality in the finding arrived at by the trial court while

acquitting accused respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC.

The prosecution has placed heavy reliance on the Exhibit-P/8 i.e. suicide note, alleged to have been written by deceasedAshwani, however, it has also

failed to prove the fact that the said suicide note was written by deceased-Ashwani himself.

It is also to be noticed that from the statements of prosecution witnesses, it is clear that there was some dispute between husband deceased-Ashwani

and wife respondent No.2-

Ruchi Sharma and on account of that she normally resided in her parental house. The prosecution has failed to establish before the trial court that

the character of the respondent No.2-Ruchi Sharma was bad and she was indulged in illegal activities or having extramarital relation with many

persons.

It is also to be noticed that from the statements of father and brother of deceased-Ashwani, it is clear that the deceased was under depression on

account of dispute with his wife and PW-9 Dr. Niraj Arora has also confirmed that before the death of Ashwani, he consumed alcohol and also

opined that if a person is alcoholic and under depression, there are chance that he may commit suicide.Â

In view of the above noted facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the trial court has committed any illegality in passing the

impugned judgment, hence, no case is made out to grant this criminal leave to appeal to file criminal appeal against the impugned judgment.

Hence, this criminal leave to appeal is dismissed.