NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/419/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 419 of 1999
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
UMESHKUMAR RAMANLAL PARIKH
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR JF MEHTA(461) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 13/10/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA) Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 16 20:40:26 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/419/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2023 undefined
1. The present appeal emanates from the judgment and order of acquittal dated 16.1.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case no.216 of 1997. The opponent accused was charged for the offence under section 302 and 498A of IPC. The trial court after examining the oral as well as documentary evidence has acquitted the opponent from the charges which were framed against the opponent.
2. Learned APP has submitted that the impugned judgment and award of acquittal dated 16.1.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is required to be quashed and set aside since the same is premised on an incorrect appreciation of the evidence. He has submitted that the trial court has misdirected itself in not appreciating the dying declaration of the deceased at Ex.11 in its true perspective. Learned APP has submitted that the evidence reveals that the opponent was harassing the deceased and ultimately he had set her ablaze on 18.10.1996 and she succumbed to the injuries on 23.10.1996. He has submitted that there is ample evidence which would suggest that the opponent accused is directly involved in the offence. However trial court has acquitted him.
3. We have heard learned APP. The case of the prosecution as per the charge Ex.1 is that the opponent accused on 18.10.1996 at 23.00 hrs. had set his wife ablaze. He has further alleged that she used to give physical as well as mental torture to the deceased. Hence the trial court framed charges against the accused under section 302 and 498A of IPC. The entire case of the prosecution is premised on the dying declaration Ex.11. The incident has occurred on 18.10.1996. The dying declaration has been recorded on Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 16 20:40:26 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/419/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2023 undefined 21.10.1996. The deceased has stated that the accused had set her ablaze without any altercation and reason on 18.10.1996. She has further stated that she is also suffering from various ailments and she had undergone major brain surgery 4 months before. She has further stated that 5 months before she had also undergone major surgery of replacement of heart valves and she is regularly taking medicines in this regard.
4. She has further stated that she was also wearing silk gown on that day. It is interesting to note that she has narrated that after the incident occurred the accused had applied burnol and thereafter she was left by him at her parental home after two days.
5. It is also established from the declaration that the husband had also tried to put off the flame. At this stage it would be apposite to refer to the evidence of Dr. Kishorbhai Kanubhai, PW6, Ex.16. He has submitted that there are 10 to 12% of the burns found on the body of the deceased. In his cross examination it is admitted that the burn injuries are not sufficient enough to cause death of the deceased. The evidence also reveals that the deceased had undergone major surgery of brain as well as heart valves. We may also refer to the pathological report. The same refers that the heart of the deceased was enlarged and she had also undergone valve surgery. It further refers that she has also undergone brain surgery and was suffering from various ailments. A combined reading of the aforesaid evidence would reveal that in fact the deceased was already suffering from major ailments and had also undergone major surgery. Burn injuries which were found on the deceased was 10 to 12% which were not sufficient enough to cause death of the deceased. Dying declaration also reveals that in fact the husband Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 16 20:40:26 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/419/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2023 undefined has also tried to put off flame. Under the circumstances and in view of the aforesaid evidence, the injuries which had suffered were not sufficient enough to cause death of the deceased. So far as charge of section 498A of IPC is concerned, the same is also not established in the present case. We may refer to the evidence of the mother of the deceased PW1 Vidhyagiri who in her deposition had stated that the entire medical expenses were borne by the opponent accused. Her evidence also does not reveal that there was any physical or mental torture meted out to the deceased by the present opponent. The deposition further reveals vague and general statement with regard to some differences between the deceased and the husband i.e. the opponent. However there are no specific instances of physical or mental torture narrated by PW1 the complainant in her deposition. It appears from the evidence that the son of the deceased along with the opponent were also present on the day of the incident. However he has not been examined as a witness. We do not in any manner find that the judgment and order of the trial court acquitting the opponent suffers from any perversity or material irregularity which would compel us to interfere. The present appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned trial court forthwith.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (GITA GOPI,J) Maulik/20 Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 16 20:40:26 IST 2023