Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Shivabhai Sureshbhai Vasava on 7 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1060 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SHIVABHAI SURESHBHAI VASAVA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS.JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 07/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 212 of 2007 on 23.11.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498-A and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short).
Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined 1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused in the
rank and file as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 That the The accused No. 1 was the husband of deceased Parul and the accused No. 2 was the mother-in-law and on 11/04/2007, at around, 14:00 Hrs, at village Fofadiya, the accused did not give the deceased money for spending and when the deceased demanded for some money, the accused quarreled with her and physically and mentally harassed her to such an extent. That she drank some pesticides and was taken to the hospital, where, she expired during treatment. The complainant Natubhai Somabhai Vasava filed the complaint before the Dy.S.P., Vadodara (Rural), Vadodara, which was registered as First Information Report No. 18 of 2007 at Sinor Police Station on 13/04/2007.
2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sinor, and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Vadodara as per the provisions of Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and case was registered Sessions Case No. 212 of 2007.
2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 4 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 5 and 6 respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to bring home the charge against the accused.
ORAL EVIDENCE
Sr. P.W. Name of the witnesses Exh.
No. Nos
1. 1. Natubhai Somabhai Vasava 09
2. 2. Champaben Natubhai Vasava 11
3. 3. Bhailalbhai Natubhai Vasava 12
4. 4. Ganeshbhai Gordhanbhai 17
5. 5. Bijaybhai Ganpatsinh Rathod 20
6. 6. Ramsinh Laxmansinh Chauhan 26
Page 3 of 18
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025
undefined
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Sr. Particulars Exh.
No.
1. Complaint 10
2. Yadi to Police Inspector Sinor 19
3. Postmortem Report 21
4. Dispensary Vardhi 27
5. Yadi to Mamlatdar 28
6. Inquest Panchnama 23
7. Panchnama of place of offence 24
8. Panchnama 25
9. Police Yadi to FSL 29
10 Primary report of Vadodara FSL 30
11 Police Yadi to FSL Surat 31
12 Muddamal receipt 32
13 Yadi of performing postmortem 22
14 Postmortem Note 21
15 Yadi of Dying Declaration 33
16 Receipt of dead body 34
2.5 After the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing
pursis at Exh. 36, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and state that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned trial Court by the impugned judgment and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from all the charges leveled against him.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective. The learned trial Court has erred in holding that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts and has failed to appreciate the evidence of the Medical Officer, who has clearly opined that the deceased has consumed poison and there was mental and physical harassment to the deceased by the accused and the evidence is sufficient to hold the accused guilty for the offence of Section 306 of the IPC. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondents and the judgement and order of acquittal is unwarranted, illegal and Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined without any basis in the eyes of law and the reasons stated while acquitting the respondent are improper, perverse and bad in law. Hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri and learned advocate Mr. Nirad Buch for the respondents. Perused the impugned judgement and order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case and submitted that the prosecution has produced oral evidences of six witnesses and fifteen documentary evidences but the learned trial Court has not appreciated the evidence and has wrongly come to the conclusion that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts. The reasons given by the learned trial Court are shaky and there are no cogent reasons for came to the conclusion that the charge against the accused is not proved. Learned APP has urged this Court that the impugned judgement and order is improper, perverse and bad in law and is required to be quashed and set aside.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Nirad Buch for the respondents has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidences Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined and passed the judgement and order of acquittal which is just and proper and no interference is required in the same and learned Advocate for the respondents has urged this court to reject the appeal of the appellant.
7. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court in the case of acquittal appeals in Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu v. State of M.P., (2006) 10 SCC 313 : AIR 2006 SC 831, this Court stated; "While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power exercised while hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the trial court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the trial court". (emphasis supplied) 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, reappreciate 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 phraseology are more in Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined 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 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.
7.1 The Apex Court in yet another recent decision in case of Sri Dattatraya Vs. Sharanappa arising out of Criminal Appeal No. 3257 of 2024 (@ SLP (Crl.) No. 13179 of 2023) observed as under:-
31. The instant case pertains to challenge against concurrent findings of fact favoring the acquittal of the respondent, it would be cogent to delve into an analysis of the principles underlining the exercise of power to adjudicate a challenge against acquittal bolstered by concurrent findings. The following broad principles can be culled out after a comprehensive analysis of judicial pronouncements:
i) Criminal jurisprudence emphasizes on the fundamental essence of liberty and presumption of innocence unless proven guilty. This presumption gets emboldened by virtue of concurrent findings of acquittal. Therefore, this court must be extra-cautious while dealing with a challenge against acquittal as the said presumption gets reinforced by virtue of a well-reasoned favorable outcome. Consequently, the onus on the prosecution side becomes more burdensome pursuant to the said double presumption.
ii) In case of concurrent findings of acquittal, this Court would ordinarily not interfere with such view considering the principle of liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India 1950, unless perversity is blatantly forthcoming and there are compelling reasons.
iii) Where two views are possible, then this Court would not ordinarily interfere and reverse the concurrent findings of acquittal. However, where the situation is such that the only conclusion which could be arrived at from a Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined comprehensive appraisal of evidence, shows that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice, then, notwithstanding such concurrent view, this Court would not restrict itself to adopt an oppugnant view. [Vide State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dan Singh]
iv) To adjudge whether the concurrent findings of acquittal are 'perverse' it is to be seen whether there has been failure of justice. This Court in Babu v.
State of Kerala clarified the ambit of the term 'perversity' as "if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/admissible material. The finding may also be said to be perverse if it is 'against the weight of evidence', or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality."
v) In situations of concurrent findings favoring accused, interference is required where the trial court adopted an incorrect approach in framing of an issue of fact and the appellate court whilst affirming the view of the trial court, lacked in appreciating the evidence produced by the accused in rebutting a legal presumption. [Vide Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh]
vi) Furthermore, such interference is necessitated to safeguard interests of justice when the acquittal is based on some irrelevant grounds or fallacies in re-appreciation of any fundamental evidentiary material or a manifest error of law or in cases of non-adherence to the principles of natural justice or the decision is manifestly unjust or where an acquittal which is fundamentally based on an exaggerated adherence to the principle of granting benefit of doubt to the accused, is liable to be set aside. Say in cases where the court severed the connection between accused and criminality committed by him upon a cursory examination of evidences. [Vide State of Punjab v. Gurpreet Singh and Others and Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar.]
8. As the accused have been charged with the offence under Section 306 of the IPC, it would be fit to refer the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in recent decision in the case of Mahendra Awase vs The State of Madhya Pradhesh Criminal Appeal No. 221/2025 (@ SLP(Cr) No. 11868/2023) observed as under:-
Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined
11. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:-
"306. Abetment of suicide. If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
12. Section 107 of the IPC reads as under:-
"107. Abetment of a thing.-A person abets the doing of a thing, who-
First. - Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly. - Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly. - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing." As is clear from the plain language of the Sections to attract the ingredient of Section 306, the accused should have abetted the commission of a suicide. A person abets the doing of a thing who Firstly - instigates any person to do that thing or Secondly - engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or Thirdly - intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
13. In Swamy Prahaladdas vs. State of M.P. and Another, [1995 Supp (3) SCC 438], the appellant remarked to the deceased that 'go and die' and the deceased thereafter, committed suicide. This Court held that:-
"3. ...Those words are casual nature which are often employed in the heat of the moment between quarreling people. Nothing serious is expected to follow thereafter. The said act does not reflect the requisite 'mens rea' on the assumption that these words would be carried out in all events. ..."
14. In Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and Another, (2010) 8 SCC 628, this Court held that in order to bring out an offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. It was further held that the intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for attracting Section 306.
15. In Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, this Court held as under:-
"12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the court must Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. [Emphasis supplied]
16. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306 IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved and established by the prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC.
17. M. Mohan vs. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626 followed Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, wherein it was held as under:-
41. This Court in SCC para 20 of Ramesh Kumar has examined different shades of the meaning of "instigation". Para 20 reads as under: (SCC p. 629) "20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do 'an act'. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
In the said case this Court came to the conclusion that there is no evidence and material available on record where-from an inference of the appellant-accused having abetted commission of suicide by Seema (the appellant's wife therein) may necessarily be drawn."
Thereafter, this Court in Mohan (supra) held:-
45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court are clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide."
[Emphasis supplied]
9. The law with regard to acquittal appeals is well crystallized and in acquittal appeals, there is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and it has finally culminated when a case ends in an acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and when the learned Trial Court has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened. That there is no inhibition to re appreciate the evidence by the Appellate Court but if after re appreciation, the view taken by the learned Trial Court was a possible view, there is no reason for the Appellate Court to interfere in the same.
10. In light of the above, the evidence of the prosecution is appreciated and the prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 1 Natubhai Somabhai Vasava at Exh. 9 and the witness is the complainant and the father of the deceased-Parulben and has stated that his daughter was married to the accused No. 1 and she was residing in a joint family with her mother-in-law, father-in- law and husband and whenever she would come to her parental home, she would tell him that they were harassing her and not even giving her one rupee to buy a shampoo to wash her hair.
Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined
That she was doing labour work and earning Rs.25/- was giving the entire amount to the accused No. 1 but the accused No. 1 was not giving her a single rupee from that amount and was physically harassing her and as she was fed up with the harassment, she had committed suicide. That he was intimated on 11th that his daughter was sick and was taken to the hospital and when he went to find out she was taken to Vadodara and when he went to Vadodara, he could not find anyone and he hence he returned back home. On the next day, once again his wife and he went to the hospital at Vadodara and found that the dead body of his daughter was kept in the postmortem room. The dead body was handed over to him and he performed the cremation rites. The complainant filed the complaint, which is produced at Exh.10. During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that whenever his daughter would come to his house, she would not speak to him but would speak to her mother and his wife would tell him about the household matters of his daughter but he never spoke to his daughter directly. That he does not know who wrote the complaint and his wife and his brother-in-law were also present when the complaint was being written. That he wrote the complaint as per the say of his wife and the complaint was filed two and half days after the incident. That when his daughter passed away, a number of persons had gathered and they Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined decided to file the complaint after discussion with all the relatives. That he does not know anything about the complaint and after the complaint was written, he was asked to sign the complaint.
10.1 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 2 Champaben Natubhai Vasava at Exh. 11 and the witness is the mother of the deceased, who has fully supported the case of the prosecution.
During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that on the last occasion when her daughter had come to her house, the accused No. 1 was also with her and they stayed for three days and thereafter left for Fofadiya. That her daughter and her son-in-law were residing separately at Fofadiya and her mother-in-law and father-in-law were residing separately in Fofadiya village and the police did not record her statement. 10.2 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 3 Bhailalbhai Natubhai Vasava at Exh. 12 and the witness is the brother of the deceased who has fully supported the case of the prosecution.
During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that Jashbhai has good relation with them and his number was given to his sister and brother-in-law. He does not know whether his sister had come one week prior to the incident and his sister and brother-in-law were residing separately at Mota Fofadiya.
Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined
10.3 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 4 Ganeshbhai Gordhanbhai at Exh. 17 and the witness is the PSO, Sinor Police Station, who has registered the complaint of the complainant being I-C.R.No. 18 of 2007 under Section 498-A, 306 and 114 of the IPC.
10.4 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 5 Bijaybhai Ganpatsinh Rathod at Exh. 20 and the witness is working as a Tutor, Forensic Medicine Department, SSG Hospital, who has conducted the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased on 12/04/2007 at SSG Hospital, Vadodara. This witness has stated that he and panel Dr. Sunil Bhatt conducted the postmortem and during the internal examination, the mucosa had contained 200 ml of yellowish fluid with an offensive smell. The cause of death was kept pending until the FSL report was received and as per report of FSL, the death had occurred due to the consumption of " fenitrothion, a type of organophosphate chemical". The witness has produced postmortem the report at Exh. 21.
During cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness stated that he mentioned the poison based on the FSL report. 10.5 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 6 Ramsinh Laxmansinh Chauhan at Exh. 26 and the witness is the Investigating Officer, who has narrated in detail the procedure that was undertaken by Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined him during investigation. During cross examination the witness has stated that the accidental death was registered but he did not investigate the same and he did not record the statement of the witnesses named by the complainant in the complaint. The accused resides in a very congested area but he has not recorded the statement of any neighbors.
11. On minute dissection of the entire evidence of the prosecution, the infirmities in the evidence have come on record and there is no iota of evidence that that the accused, at any point of time, had harassed the deceased to such an extent that she was instigated or intentionally aided to consume poison and commit suicide. The complainant has clearly stated that he does not know the details of the complaint and he had never spoken directly to his daughter and hence he does not whether the deceased was actually harassed by the accused. The mother of the deceased had admitted that on the last occasion, the deceased had come along with the accused No. 1 and they had stayed for three days and there is no evidence that the deceased was in fact not provided even one rupee for purchasing shampoo and other articles. The Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of the neighbor even though the accused and the deceased were staying in a very congested area and as per the case of the prosecution, the deceased was immediately taken to CHC Mota Fofadiya, but there is no evidence on record regarding the Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined treatment given at CHC, Mota Fofadiya. Moreover, the treating doctors have not been examined and it has not come on record as to whether the deceased was alive at the time when she was taken to hospital and whether she has narrated any details in the history before the Medical Officer. There is a delay of two and half days in filing the complaint and immediately after the incident, the accidental death case was registered but the investigation papers regarding the accidental death has not been brought on record. It has also come on record that the accused No. 1 and the deceased were residing separately and from the deposition of Prosecution Witness No. 2 Champaben Natubhai Vasava at Exh. 11 it emerges that the witness wanted the deceased to stay at her house but the deceased wanted to go back to her matrimonial home. The learned trial Court has, in paragraph no. 15 of the judgment, discussed the ingredients of Section 498-A and Section 306 of the IPC and the evidence on record and has passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
12. In view of the settled position of law in the decisions of Mahendra Awase (Supra) the learned trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1060/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2025 undefined in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed.
13. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 212 of 2007 on 23.11.2007, is hereby confirmed.
14. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) VVM Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Feb 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 08 03:01:34 IST 2025