Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs T.Koli Ghanshyambhai Lalji Bhai on 19 July, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 38 of 2004
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
T.KOLI GHANSHYAMBHAI LALJI BHAI & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ROHAN N SHAH, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Appellant(s) No. 1
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,4,5
MR DIVYANG A RAMANI(7180) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,4,5
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 19/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI)
1.The State has challenged the judgment and order of acquittal dated 09.10.2003 in Sessions Case No.29 of 2000, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Page 1 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined Surendranagar. The trial was against five of the accused under Sections 302, 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohan N. Shah has tendered before this Court the verification Report of the Police Inspector, Chuda Police Station, District Surendranagar, alongwith a copy of the Death Certificate which shows that the respondent No.3 - Laljibhai Bhalabhai Koli and respondent No.4 - Champaben Lajibhai Koli have died. The report is ordered to be taken on record. Hence, the present Appeal qua the respondents No.3 and 4 stands abated.
3.The deceased complainant-Ranjanben had married Shankarbhai Laljibhai Koli who is arraigned as accused No.5, one and a half year prior to the incident. As per the complaint, it is alleged that 10-11 days prior to the incident, the deceased had gone to her parental home and her father-in-law had come to take her back. On Page 2 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined 14.07.1998, in the afternoon, the deceased had come to her village at her matrimonial house at Village Jobada and was eating food in her room. At that time, the mother-in-law-Champaben had asked the deceased to take rice for her husband who was in the field at Village Salala. The deceased stated that she would go later on as she was hungry and that caused verbal altercation between the deceased and mother-in-law. After some time, the deceased was on her way to Village Salala to give rice to her husband, the husband asked the deceased as to why she had come there and that he had no work with her and also questioned her as to why she went against his mother. It is further alleged that the husband gave kick and fist blows and thereafter, she returned to her parental home. On 15.07.1998 the maternal uncle and other family members met the deceased and left her back at the matrimonial home. It is stated that a settlement was arrived at between the matrimonial family members and paternal family members. Thereafter, in the Page 3 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined evening at about 5.00 clock, at Village Jobada at Shivabhai's house, the maternal family members had gone to have tea, at that time, the complainant was sitting in her room. It is alleged that the deceased's elder brothers-in-law Ghanshyambhai Laljibhai and Mansukhbhai Laljibhai, father-in-law Laljibhai Bhalabhai, mother-in-law Champaben Laljibhai and the husband-Shankarbhai Laljibhai Koli came in the room. It is alleged that in the hands of both the elder brothers-in-law, there was a kerosene filled in a 'kathrot' (a large shallow, wooden plate or trencher, often used for kneading dough), the father-in-law and mother-in-law instigated them to pour kerosene, the elder brothers-in-law poured kerosene on her and the deceased was set ablaze with a match stick.
4.During the course of trial, 12 witnesses were examined. The parents of the deceased-Ranjanben had not supported the case of the prosecution. The incident is alleged to have taken place on the day when the Page 4 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined members of the matrimonial side and the paternal side had gathered to settle the issue. The deceased actually had gone back at the paternal home. It also appears that the deceased was not ready to stay alongwith the matrimonial family members. The members of the paternal side were present there in the village and they had gone to the house of Shivabhai Virambhai for tea and during the course of the day, the alleged incident has taken place. The learned trial Court Judge after examination of the witnesses and assessing the evidence was not ready to believe the case of the complainant.
5.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohan N. Shah has relied upon the deposition of Dr. Jagruti Janshali at Exhibit 44, who had medically examined the deceased. It is submitted that though the deceased had suffered 90% burns, but as per the evidence of the Doctor, it cannot be believed that the lady could not state the facts as given in the complaint. It is further Page 5 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined submitted that though the deceased was having difficulty in speaking, the complaint could not be denied and therefore, considering these facts, the present appeal may be allowed.
6.Having heard the submissions canvassed and on perusing the records of the case, it surfaces that the learned trial Court Judge has referred to the deposition of the learned Executive Magistrate who had recorded the dying declaration. In the dying declaration, the learned Executive Magistrate has stated that the time taken for answering the question was after a long period. However, the whole dying declaration would suggest that the deceased has not named anyone in the dying declaration. The dying declaration does not bear the endorsement of the Doctor of the deceased's mental and physical state to give a declaration. Further, the thumb impression has not been identified by the Doctor or nurse, which the learned trial Court Judge has observed in the judgment and order.
Page 6 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined
7.There appears to be two dying declarations on record. In one of the dying declarations at Exhibit 57, the deceased has given the cause for setting herself ablaze is that since her husband was eating in the company of elder sister-in-law (jethani) and that she rebuked him and because of that reason, they were harassing her and beating her and were also having the intention to give a divorce.
8.The statement of the deceased could not be corroborated by the statement of her mother and father who have turned hostile. The day on which the incident had occurred was when the members of both the sides had gathered to settle the dispute. As per the deposition of the witness-Shivabhai Virambhai, five members had come from the side of the deceased and he was called by Laljibhai and they had gone to the house of Laljibhai. At that time, the deceased stated that she does not want to stay with her husband and she wanted to return back at the paternal house. In Page 7 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined fact, the father-in-law had stated that they did not want to give a divorce. Such a conversation was taking place between the parties. The learned trial Court Judge has denied to believe the dying declaration. Other witnesses have not given any supporting evidence. The only evidence which comes from the testimony of Dr. Jagruti Janshali is that the deceased at that time, was conscious she has referred to the history given by the injured deceased that father-in- law said that brother-in-law had burned her, that evidence itself would not bring credibility to the history noted. The doctor has stated of 90% burns .It is also admitted by Dr. Jagruti Janshali that on the hands of the patient, there were no burns. It is further admitted that there was swelling on her face and neck. The face, lips and neck was severely burnt and it was difficult for the deceased to speak. That itself can be appreciated to consider that the deceased was not in a fit state of mind or was not in position to give history with 90% burns. Further the question will arise as to how whole Page 8 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined body got burnt but no burns were found on hands. This itself creates doubt on prosecution case.
9.The fact which also comes on record is that the deceased herself was not ready to stay with the husband. The cross examination of the witness as observed by the learned trial Court Judge reveals the fact that the deceased was disliking the husband as he was dark; the deceased was fair and her parents were forcibly sending her to the matrimonial house against her wishes. No witness could corroborate any continuous harassment from the side of the accused. Further, the case of elder brothers-in-law alleged to have poured the kerosene as well as the instigation of the parents-in-law could not be proved on record. While no evidence could be proved, of the deceased to corroborate the fact of the illicit relation of the husband with the sister-in-law, to consider it as mental or physical cruelty. The deceased had informed her mother that she got burnt while cooking. The Page 9 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined prosecution case of the elder brothers-in-law burning the deceased and the instigation of the parents-in-law could not be proved. The panchnama of the place of incident does not bring out this fact since no kerosene was found on the floor. The learned trial Court Judge on appreciation of the evidence found it fit to give benefit of doubt to the accused and has acquitted the respondents on appreciation of evidence.
10. We also find that the learned Judge has given consistent reasoning to appreciate the evidence as referred hereinabove. We do not find any inconsistency or blatant illegality to the conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge, Surendranagar to take a contrary view and upset the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge.
11. In the case of Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab, (2010) 2 SCC 333, it has been observed as under :-
"61. In a case of acquittal, if the trial court's view is a possible or plausible view, then the Appellate Court or the High Court would not be justified in interfering with it. It is the settled legal position Page 10 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/38/2004 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/07/2025 undefined that there is presumption of innocence and that presumption is further fortified with the acquittal of the accused by the trial court. The Appellate Court or the High Court would not be justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal unless it comes to a clear conclusion that the judgment of the trial court is utterly perverse and, on the basis of the evidence on record, no other view is plausible or possible than the one taken by the Appellate Court or the High Court."
12. In view of the aforesaid discussion and observation and also taking into consideration the principles laid down in the above referred decision of Darshan Singh (supra), the present Appeal stands dismissed. Record and proceedings, be sent to the concerned Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J) Sd/-
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) CAROLINE / DB # 12 Page 11 of 11 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:56:09 IST 2025