Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Pravinkumar Amarsinh Dabhi on 25 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 635 of 1997
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
PRAVINKUMAR AMARSINH DABHI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR NITIN M AMIN(126) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 25/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgement and order of acquittal dated 22.04.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Camp, Anand in Sessions Case No.149 of 1996.
2. The respondent-accused was charged with the offences, as per the Charge at Exh.3, under Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined
3. Initial statement was recorded by the police at Balasinor Police Station (Exh.16) of father- in-law of the deceased, (PW-2) Amrabhai Shankerbhai Dabhi and father of the accused, who has stated that around 5 a.m. in the morning, when he was in his field along with his wife Fuliben and two sons while cutting crops, he heard some cries and when he ran there, he saw that the deceased, who is his daughter-in-law, was lying in the hall and upon her, some blankets were also placed. He saw that the deceased was entirely burnt and unconscious and thereafter, she was taken to Balasinor Government Dispensary by his brothers Fulabhai and Kalabhai. Thus, the first incident has been reported by the father- in-law of the deceased. Accordingly, the complaint was registered on 13.03.1996 at Exh.37 by PW-8, who was a constable. He has been declared hostile. The prosecution in the cross- examination has failed to establish any evidence which can come to its rescue.
4. PW-8, Tejabhai Somabhai, he was serving as a constable, who has recorded the statement of the complainant, is examined at Exh.35. He has deposed that after the father-in-law of the deceased namely, Amrabhai Shankarbhai, came to the Police Station, he went to the hospital and Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined recorded the statement of the deceased. In the examination-in-chief, he has asserted that when he went to the hospital, and he inquired from the deceased about the incident, and she informed him that she was set ablaze by the accused in the morning by pouring kerosene on her. She also told him about the harassment by demand of gold by the accused. Accordingly, this witness has deposed that the complaint at Exh.37 was registered by him. In the cross-examination, it is elicited from him that he has not taken opinion of any doctor while recording the statement, though the doctor was present. It is further deposed by him that the doctor had denied to give any certificate about the fitness of the deceased. Thus, recording of the complaint at Exh.37 and the manner in which story is narrated by the deceased becomes doubtful, looking to the degree of burns suffered by the deceased.
5. At this stage, we may refer to the testimony of the doctor, who has performed Post Mortem of the deceased i.e. PW-1, Dr.Arvind Harihar Savjit examined at Exh.9. He has categorically deposed that the deceased had suffered 95%-98% burn injuries. Thus, in light of his evidence, the version, as projected by the prosecution of recording the complaint, itself is doubtful. The Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined deceased had suffered 95%-98% burns and as per his deposition, she was entirely burnt and he has also referred that in such case, there is all possibility of giving sedatives and pain killers.
6. We have also referred to the Dying Declaration (Exh.19) recorded by the Executive Magistrate i.e. PW-3, Somabhai Mavjibhai Baraiya. The Dying Declaration specifically refers that the doctor has refused to put signature on the same. Such fact is also admitted by the Executive Magistrate (PW-3). Hence, the Dying Declaration pales into insignificance and cannot be considered as valid proof of statement of the deceased recorded by the Executive Magistrate.
7. Another relevant witness is PW-2, Amrabhai Shankarbhai Dabhi, is also declared hostile by the prosecution.
8. PW-6, Kalabhai Shankarbhai, who is also a relative of the complainant, has deposed that after hearing shouts, he and his wife rushed to the house and when they forcefully opened the door after giving the kick blows, they saw that the deceased was lying under the cot in the burnt condition and all of them had put blankets on her and thereafter, they informed his brother i.e. Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined the complainant from his field. He has also been declared hostile.
9. PW-9, the Investigating Officer, who is examined at Exh.43 has also admitted that no efforts are made to assure the medical fitness of the deceased, though the doctors were present.
10. The father of the deceased i.e. PW-4 at Exh.20 in his cross-examination, has admitted that for the first time, he came to know that she was harassed for one tola (10 grms.) gold by the accused in the hospital.
11. Thus, prior to this incident, in 4 years of marriage span, there is no speck of evidence to suggest or prove offence of either under Section 498A of the IPC or under the provisions of the Dowry Act. His deposition also does not inspire confidence and does not in any manner implicate the accused in the offence.
12. Thus, on an overall appreciation of the evidence, which is surfaced on record, the Trial Court has not committed any perversity in acquitting the accused from the offence, for which he is charged.
Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined
13. At this stage, we may refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Chandrappa and Ors. vs. State of Karnataka, 2007 4 S.C.C. 415, wherein the Apex Court, while considering the provision of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the scope of the appellate Court in examining the appeal against the acquittal, has observed thus:
"41. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge;
(1) An appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded;
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law;
(3) Various expressions, such as, 'substantial and compelling reasons', 'good and sufficient grounds', 'very strong circumstances', 'distorted conclusions', 'glaring mistakes', etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal.
Such phraseologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/635/1997 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court."
14. The paramount consideration of the Court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice, which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. Keeping in mind the parameters set by the Apex Court, after scrutiny of the evidence, we find the acquittal recorded by the Trial Court just and proper.
15. In view of the foregoing observations, the present appeal fails. The same is hereby dismissed. Record and Proceedings to be sent back.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J) NVMEWADA/1 Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Wed Apr 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 30 22:33:16 IST 2025