Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Patel Dharamshibhai Thakarshi Bhai on 14 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 639 of 1999
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
PATEL DHARAMSHIBHAI THAKARSHI BHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR L.B.DABHI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MS TEJAL A VASHI(2704) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 14/05/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT)
1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 20.04.1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in Session Case No.108 of 1994. By way of the impugned judgment and order, the accused have been acquitted of all the charges levelled against them under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC").
Page 1 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined
2. The short facts of the prosecution case read as under:-
2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that Chandanben (hereinafter referred to as the "deceased") was married to Accused No. 1, Patel Dharamsinhbhai Thakarsinhbhai, fourteen months prior to the incident that took place on 21st July 1993, at approximately 9:00 p.m. On that day, the deceased allegedly committed suicide at her matrimonial home by consuming poisonous medicine. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased, respectively.
2.2 The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by the father of the deceased, alleging that the accused had demanded a fridge and subjected her to cruelty, which ultimately led to her suicide.
2.3 The Investigating Officer recorded witness statements, prepared panchnamas including panchnama of scene of offence etc. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against accused. The Magistrate has committed the case to be tried by Session Court - Trial Court.
2.4 Upon completion of the investigation and upon committal of the case to the Trial Court, learned Trial Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, has found so many contradictions in the version of witnesses and complainant, who have been examined by the prosecution and the story enumerated by complainant as well as other supporting witnesses, are not found trust worthy. Thus, considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court, Page 2 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined has acquitted all the accused from all the charges.
3. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.B.Dabhi and learned advocate Mr. Neel Dave for learned advocate Ms. Tejal A. Vashi for the accused No.1 -
respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Dipak R. Dave for accused No.2 and 3 - respondent nos.2 and 3 at length, who have taken us through various oral evidence as well as documentary evidence, which are on record. We have independently examined and appreciated evidence of witnesses.
4. Learned Trial Judge, framed charges vide Exh.6 against the Respondents - Accused for the aforesaid offences. The Respondents - Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has also produced the following oral and documentary evidence.
Oral Evidences of Prosecution
PW.No. Exh.No. Name and Particulars
1 20 Complianant,
2 46 Diptiben Sanatbhai Triveid
3 47 Amitaben Himatbhai Patel,
4 54 Panch- Prabhudas Shamjibhai
5 56 Dr.Dineshbhai Harjibhai Gohil
6 60 Raghavjibhai Jasmatbhai
7 64 PSI - Jovabhai Hathibhai Manjriya
8 71 Hemendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta
9 77 PSI - Arjunbhai Girdharilal Mistry
10 81 PSO - Ranchodbhai Narsihnbhai
Documentary Evidences
Sr.No. Exh-No. Document Particulars
1. 48 to 53 Letter and Invitation Card of marriage
2. 55 Panchnama of place of occurrence
3. 57 Post mortem report
Page 3 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
4. 58 Death certificate
5. 62 List of Kariyavar
6. 69 Complaint
7. 72 Inquest Panchnama
8. 84 Panchnama of Arrest
9. 86 Police Report forwarded to Civil Surgeon
10 90 FSL Report
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.B.Dabhi would submit that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law and evidence on record and the findings recorded by the Trial Court are erroneous and based on irrelevant material.
5.1 He would further submit that learned Trial Court has committed an error in acquitting the respondents - accused and has not properly appreciated the evidence produced on record, though the prosecution had proved its case against the accused and learned Trial Court has given undue weightage to the minor omission and contradiction in the version of witnesses though there was no any material omission and contradiction in the evidence of the witnesses.
5.2 Learned APP would further submit that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that the duration of the deceased's marriage was barely fourteen months. Due to the constant demand for dowry and the cruelty she endured, she was compelled to commit suicide.
5.3 Learned APP would further submit that the Trial Court failed to draw any legal presumption in favor of the prosecution regarding the abetment of the deceased's suicide as well as the dowry death. In doing so, the Trial Court completely overlooked Sections 113A and 113B of the Evidence Act.
Page 4 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined 5.4 Learned APP would further submit that the family members of deceased, who has been examined, have confirmed one fact that there was a demand of dowry by accused no.1 It was further stated that the deceased faced constant cruelty, and despite being an educated woman, she tragically died by suicide by consuming poisonous medicine. It is highly improbable for a woman to take such an extreme step within just 14 months of marriage without significant underlying reasons.
5.5 Thus, the reasons assigned by the learned Trial Court while acquitting the accused are unjust, improper, perverse and unwarranted to the facts of the prosecution case and thereby, has committed an error in acquitting the accused. It is further submitted that the prosecution has established the guilt of all the accused and learned Trial Court has committed an error both on law and facts.
5.6 Thus, the learned Trial Court has wrongly recorded the order of acquittal, which deserves to be quashed and appropriate sentences for the offences be passed against all the accused and he urged this Court to allow the captioned appeal.
6. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Neel Dave, appearing for the accused, has vehemently opposed the appeal, contending, inter alia, that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused. 6.1 Learned advocate Mr. Dave would submit that the prosecution has failed to establish the charges, as each prosecution witness presented a different account regarding the cruelty, and due to this inconsistency, the charges under Page 5 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined Section 498-A of the IPC were not proven. He would further submit that since it was not proved on record that the deceased was subjected to cruelty, no presumption of abetment of suicide could have been drawn by the Trial Court, nor could any presumption of dowry death be inferred.
6.2 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that there are various contradictions in the statements of the complainant as well as the deceased's sister, Diptiben, which create reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case. Having failed to establish their case beyond a reasonable doubt, the Trial Court has correctly acquitted the accused of all charges.
6.3 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that there is no other independent witness to support the prosecution's case. The only witness examined by the prosecution, Himendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta, a friend of Accused No. 1, did not testify to any resentment between the deceased and Accused No.1.
6.4 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that so far as oral evidence of complainant - father of deceased, sisters of deceased - Diptiben and Amitaben as well as deceased's Uncle - Raghavjibhai, they all are relative of deceased.
6.5 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that Accused No.1 had given additional statement and examined himself wherein he has categorically deposed that after marriage, accused residing with deceased at Bhavnagar but due to ill health of his father, he was used to look after the Page 6 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined shop situated at Sihor, thereby, accused no.1 having told the deceased to shift at his native in the village, deceased was not like to move in the village which was a factor weight with deceased to commit an act of suicide. So, he would submit that none of the accused have played any active role and deceased was not subjected to cruelty soon before her death and/ or demanded any dowry, whereby, ingredients of Section 498-A, 304-B and 306 were not made out by prosecution.
\ 6.6 He would further submit that in a case of acquittal, there would be a total presumption of innocence in favour of accused and as per such legal position of law and criteria laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while deciding appeal against order of acquittal, this Court may not disturb the order of acquittal. Thus, the learned Trial Court has correctly acquitted the accused so he has requested this Court not to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
7. Before dealing with merit of the appeal, at this stage, we would first like to remind ourselves the position of law propounded by Supreme Court of India in its various decisions, whereby it has laid down several criteria while deciding acquittal appeal.
8. It would be apt to refer and rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court of India in a case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Others vs. State of Karnataka [(2024) 8 SCC 149] has held as under:
"39. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasadv. State of Bihar and Another, (2022) 3 SCC 471 encapsulated the Page 7 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined legal position covering the field after considering variousearlier judgments and held as below: -
"29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [ Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 ] " 42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the 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 Criminal Procedure Code, 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 emphasise 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 is 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 Page 8 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined recorded by the trial court."
40. Further, in the case of H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581 this Court summarized the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC as follows: -
"8.1.The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after re- appreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible."
41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-
41.1 That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; 41.2 That the same misreading/omission to evidence on record; is based on a consider material 41.3 That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.
42. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court."Page 9 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined
9. Now, keeping in mind the aforesaid ratio, we have gone through the impugned judgment and re-appreciated entire sets of evidence so as to confirm whether the accused could have been held guilty for commission of crime under Section 498-A, 304-B, 306 read with Section 114 of of I.P.C?. Nonetheless, we could not find any infirmity either in findings so recorded by Trial Court and its ultimate conclusion by which accused has been acquitted from all the charges due to following reasons:-
10. The Trial Court has considered the oral as well as documentary evidence, whereby, each and every relevant witness and the evidence have been discussed in detail. The learned Trial Court has considered the aspect with regards to contradictions in the evidence of prosecution so observed in para 13 and 14 of the impugned judgment, whereby, arrived at a conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove the incident so narrated by them so, gave benefit of doubt to accused.
11. Even after re-appreciating oral and documentary evidence by this Court, we are unable to reach a conclusion that Trial Court had committed any error while acquitting accused.
11.1 The fact remains that the deceased was an educated woman, working at the time of the unfortunate event, during which she committed suicide while staying in the city of Bhavnagar. However, according to the further statement/evidence of Accused No. 1, due to family circumstances, the deceased was told by her husband to move to his native village Surka, , as Accused No. 1 was required to look after his family shop selling pesticides in Sihor, District Page 10 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined Bhavnagar. This situation caused resentment between the couple.
11.2 It further comes from the evidence that on the day of the incident, due to the aforementioned circumstances, Accused No. 1 did not drop the deceased off at her place of work. Instead, Accused No. 2, her brother-in-law, took her to drop at her office. It is possible that the deceased might have felt that, if she were to move to Accused No. 1's village, she would have to leave her job, despite being a qualified woman. The Trial Court considered this would be one of the reasons for her committing suicide, which cannot be regarded as a perverse finding, especially in light of the overall facts and circumstances of the present case.
11.3 It has come on record that each family member of the deceased had their own version of the cruelty allegedly inflicted on the deceased by the accused, which weakens the case of the prosecution regarding the charges of cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC. The Trial Court correctly observed that contradictions emerged during the cross-examination of the complainant being father, her sisters, and her uncle, leading to the conclusion that the charges under Section 498- A was not proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Even otherwise, no specific allegation of cruelty by accused on her came out of their evidence which would lead to believe that case of cruelty was not proved beyond doubt.
11.4 Further, while re-appreciating the evidence of the deceased's sisters, namely Diptiben and Amritaben - PW-2, it is observed that both have provided different versions of the events of cruelty and demand of dowary. As such, no specific Page 11 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined allegation of cruelty has emerged from their evidence that would hold the accused guilty of the offence of cruelty. Moreover, they did not inform their father that the deceased had ever told them about any demand for dowry by the accused. In their police statements, they have not mentioned any such fact regarding the demand of dowry by accused Nos. 2 and 3.
11.5 It has also come on record that Diptiben deposed certain facts in her evidence which were not recorded in her police statement. The Trial Court correctly observed that her evidence suggested that her statement was recorded only after a delay of five to six days from the registration of the FIR, likely to facilitate the arrest of the accused. She was unable to elaborate on the details of the alleged cruelty, and other than a mention of a demand for a fridge, she could not demonstrate how the deceased was subjected to cruelty. It was also surprising that, until the deceased's death, any allegations of cruelty or dowry demands were never revealed to her parents. Therefore, Diptiben's conduct came under cloud, and the Trial Court rightly disbelieved her testimony.
11.6 So far as the oral evidence of another sister of the deceased, namely Amritaben - PW-3 is concerned, her police statement was recorded about one month after the complaint was filed, as she was called from her in-laws' place in Surat. It has come on record that she never shared any details of the cruelty or dowry demands, either with her father or her husband, until her statement was recorded. Some of the facts stated by her were contradicted by the oral evidence of Hemendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta, a friend of accused No. Page 12 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined 1, who presented photographs showing that he, along with his family and the deceased, had gone on an outing together.
11.7 The uncle of the deceased, namely Ragavjibhai PW-6, who was residing in Bhavnagar, was examined by the prosecution, but his evidence did not further support the case of the prosecution. According to his testimony, on the day of kite flying, i.e., 14th January 1993, the deceased visited his residence and spoke about the cruelty and dowry demands by the accused to his wife. However, he also mentioned that she had previously visited with her husband but never disclosed any such cruelty or dowry demands. It has come on record that on the day of the kite flying event, the deceased was at her job and did not visit her uncle's residence. As a result, the Trial Court did not believe the uncle's testimony. It is difficult to believe that Ragavjibhai, residing in Bhavnagar where the deceased also lived with her husband, was never informed by her about the ongoing cruelty or dowry demands, as alleged by the complainant and his family members.
11.8 The overall assessment of the evidence suggests that the deceased was not subjected to cruelty immediately prior to her death by the accused. Instead, it appears that she might have committed suicide for reasons unrelated to alleged cruelty and or the accused, which the prosecution unfortunately failed to establish. Further statement of accused No. 1 indicate that the deceased was an educated woman who was unwilling to stay in the village and did not want to leave her job, which could have been one of the factors contributing to her suicide. Such a possibility cannot be ruled out, given the shaky evidence presented during the trial.
Page 13 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined
12. Once, prosecution failed to establish the charge of Section 498-A i.e., Cruelty inflicted by accused upon deceased soon before her death, no legal presumption either under Section 113-A and 113-B of Evidence Act can be drawn in favour of prosecution. According to us, prosecution has egregiously failed to prove charges against accused.
13. Thus, after overall assessment of evidence and its re-
appreciation as well as reasons assigned by learned Trial Court, we are in complete agreement with view taken by the Trial Court having acquitted the accused by giving benefit of doubt.
14. Considering these set of evidences on record and in light of the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reproduced hereinabove, which deals with the law on acquittal, we are of the opinion that no error has been committed by the Trial Court, Bhavnagar, in Sessions Case No.108 of 1994 while acquitting the respondents.
15. The appeal is accordingly DISMISSED. Resultantly, the impugned judgment and order of the trial court is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record and proceedings, if called for, be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) MOHD MONIS Page 14 of 14 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025