Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ravibhai Balvantbhai Dantani on 2 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 528 of 2012
======================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
RAVIBHAI BALVANTBHAI DANTANI & ORS.
======================================
Appearance:
MR HARDIK S. SONI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR J G PANCHAL(2672) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR MIHIR H PATHAK(5261) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
======================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date : 02/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the
Code") is filed by the State of Gujarat challenging the
judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.12.2011 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge (Chief Court), Gandhinagar in
Sessions Case No. 60 of 2011, whereby the learned trial Judge
acquitted the respondent - accused of the charges for the
offences punishable under Sections 294(A), 306, 498A, 502
and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as
"IPC").
2. The brief facts leading to the prosecution case are
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
that: -
2.1 An offence was registered against the respondents
before Chandkheda Police station vide C.R. No. I - 106 of 2010
for the alleged offences under Sections 498A, 306, 294(a),
506(2) and 114 of the "IPC".
2.2 It is case of the prosecution that, accused Nos. 1
and 2 are staying adjoining the house of accused No. 3 -
husband of the deceased - Sushilaben. Accused No. 3 -
husband of the deceased - Sushilaben was gazing towards the
accused No. 2 - Mayaben and due to this reason, accused No.1
Ravibhai gave filthy abuses to accused No.3 - Natwarbhai and
his wife - Sushilaben (deceased) and also administered threat
to cause death. It is the case of the prosecution that, on
25.05.2010 in the morning hours, deceased had prepared tea
and offered the same to husband - Natwarbhai and while
offering tea, she asked him that, "why he is looking towards
Mayaben", on account of which quarrel occurred. The same
quarrel occurred prior to one month also, and therefore, in
continuation of the quarrels, the feelings of deceased -
Sushilaben got hurt and she committed suicide by pouring
kerosene on her body and setting herself on fire. Thus, it is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
alleged that all the accused persons with the help of each
other, caused physical and mental torture to the deceased -
Sushilaben as well as administered threats and thereby,
committed the offence under Sections 498A, 306, 294(a),
506(2) and 114 of the "IPC".
2.3 Resultantly, a complaint was lodged before the
Chandkheda Police station for alleged offence under Sections
498A, 306, 294(a), 506(2) and 114 of the "IPC" and pursuant
to which, investigation machinery was put into motion.
2.4 Necessary investigation was carried out and
statements of other witnesses were recorded. During the
course of investigation, the respondents were arrested.
Ultimately, the charge-sheet came to be filed before the
learned Magistrate, Gandhinagar and since the case was
exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed
to the Court of Sessions at Gandhinagar, where the case was
registered as Sessions Case No. 60 of 2011 and trial was
initiated against the respondents.
2.5 To prove the case against the accused -
respondents, the prosecution examined in all 8 witnesses and
produced and proved 10 documentary evidence.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
2.6 At the conclusion of trial, after recording statement
of accused under Section 313 of "the Code" and after hearing
the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the defence,
the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents of all the
charges leveled against them by passing the impugned
judgment and order.
2.7 Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the
aforesaid judgment and order of acquittal passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, the State as appellant has preferred
this appeal.
3. Heard learned APP Mr. Hardik S. Soni for the
appellant - State, Mr. J.G. Panchal, learned advocate for the
respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. Mihir H. Pathak, learned
advocate for the respondent No. 3.
4. Learned APP Mr. Hardik S. Soni for the State
submitted that upon committal of the case to the Sessions
Court, Gandhinagar, the learned Sessions Judge framed
charges vide Exhibit-5 against the respondents - accused for
the aforesaid offences. The respondents - accused pleaded not
guilty and were tried.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
4.1 The details of the evidence placed by prosecution
are reproduced in a tabular form as under:-
Oral Evidence
Pw. EXH. Nature of Remarks /
Name of Witness
No. No. Witness Pg. No.
Jagdishbhai Ishwarbhai Hostile / 83-
1 11 Panch
Hostile / 89-
2 14 Anupasinh Hiralal Verma Panch
Ushaben Natwarbhai Deceased Support / 93-
3 15
Prajapati daughter-1 98
Anita Ben Natwarbhai Deceased Support / 99-
4 16
Prajapati daughter-2 102
Prahladbhai Kemabhai Executive Support / 105-
5 17
Parmar Magistrate 120
Anupkumar Ramgopal Doctor Support / 131-
6 20
Bansal compounder 140
Deceased Hostile / 159-
7 24 Mukesh bhai Patel
sister 164
Support / 165-
8 25 Yasodhaben Narsinhbhai PSI
Documentary Evidence
Sr. EXH.
Name of Evidence Pg. No.
No. No.
1 26 Telephone Wardhi 175-176
2 27 Complaint 177-180
3 19 Dying Declaration 125-130
4 28 Panchnamu of the offences place 181-188
5 23 Inquest Panchnamu 153-158
6 29 Dhead Certificate 189-192
7 21 P.M. Report 141-148
8 30 Muddamal Rawangi Note 193-198
9 31 FSL Report 199-200
10 32 FSL'S Pruthkaran Report 201-206
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
4.2 Learned APP submitted that; thus, the prosecution
has examined the complainant, witnesses, medical officer and
police witness, which according to the prosecution, is enough
for bringing home the charge in support of their case.
4.3 The prosecution in the trial has relied on
documentary evidence in support of the oral evidences led
before the trial Court, which proves the involvement of the
accused. At the end of the evidence, necessary pursis was
presented before the trial Court declaring closure of evidence.
The trial Court has thereafter proceeded to record the further
statement of the accused under Section 313 of "the Code".
With such evidence being noticed, the trial Court after
evaluating the same arrived at a conclusion that prosecution
has failed to prove the charge against the respondents -
accused and has thereby, recorded acquittal.
4.4 Learned APP submitted that the learned trial Court
has considered acquitting the accused on the reasoning that
version of complainant, husband and wife (deceased) were
having major contradictions, their behavior as per the versions
given before the investigating agency and the Court are
unnatural. The investigating agency has not properly
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
investigated the brother of deceased i.e. Mukeshbhai
Badarbhai Patel and also the dying declarations were taken at
the hospital.
4.5 The learned trial Court has observed that there are
no direct or indirect evidence, which may be helpful to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that the accused have committed
the offence in question. However, learned APP submitted that
the evidence in the form of dying declaration dated 25.05.2010
was not appropriately considered by the learned trial Judge.
When the dying declaration was given, the deceased was
conscious and she had given a reference of the threat given by
accused Nos. 1 and 2. Moreover, the mental torture given by
husband - accused No. 3 is also stated in the dying
declaration. The dying declaration, if read with the FIR, which
was lodged on the very day in the hospital, refers to the same
allegation, which states that she was mentally tortured on
account of complaint/threat by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and
ignorance pleaded by respondent No. 3 over such threat,
which has resulted into action of committal of suicide.
4.6 Moreover, the examination of PW-3 - Ushaben
Natwarbhai Prajapati (Daughter of the deceased) and PW-4 -
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
Anitaben Natwarbhai Prajapati (Daughter of the deceased) was
not appropriately considered by the trial Court. If all these
evidences are collectively examined and read, the prosecution
has established that the incident of committal of suicide has
occasioned on account of threat given by accused -
respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and the mental torture given by
respondent No. 3 - husband.
4.7 Learned APP submitted that, at this stage, it would
be apposite to refer to a decision of the Honourable Supreme
Court in the case of Kumar @ Shiva Kumar v. State of
Karnataka reported in 2024 (0) AIJEL-SC 73335, wherein
consideration of Section 306 "IPC" has been read with Section
107 of "IPC" has been considered 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.
31.1. Thus, as per Section 306 of IPC, if any person
commits suicide, then 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
32. The crucial word in Section 306 of IPC is 'abets'.
'Abetment' is defined in Section 107 of IPC. Section 107
of IPC reads thus:
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.
Explanation 1.- A person who, by wilful
misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a
material fact which he is bound to disclose,
voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause
or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate
the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2.- Whoever, either prior to or at the
time of the commission of an act, does anything in
order to facilitate the commission of that act, and
thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to
aid the doing of that act.
32.1. From a reading of Section 107 IPC what is
deducible is that a person would be abetting the doing
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
of a thing if he instigates any person to do that thing or
if he encourages with one or more person or persons in
any conspiracy for doing that thing or if he intentionally
aids by any act or illegal omission doing of that thing.
Explanation 1 clarifies that even if a person by way of
wilful misrepresentation or concealment of a material
fact which he is otherwise bound to disclose voluntarily
causes or procures or attempts to cause or procure a
thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that
thing. Similarly, it is clarified by way of Explanation-2
that whoever does anything in order to facilitate the
commission of an act, either prior to or at the time of
commission of the act, is said to aid the doing of that
act."
Further, in the very same decision, the Honourable
Supreme Court has held as under:-
"47. Human mind is an enigma. It is well neigh
impossible to unravel the mystery of the human mind.
There can be myriad reasons for a man or a woman to
commit or attempt to commit suicide: it may be a case
of failure to achieve academic excellence, oppressive
environment in college or hostel, particularly for
students belonging to the marginalized sections,
joblessness, financial difficulties, disappointment in love
or marriage, acute or chronic ailments, depression, so
on and so forth. Therefore, it may not always be the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
case that someone has to abet commission of suicide.
Circumstances surrounding the deceased in which he
finds himself are relevant.
48. Coming to the facts of the present case, we do not
find any evidence on the basis of which we can hold the
appellant guilty of abetting the suicide of the deceased.
While the death of a young woman is certainly very
tragic, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty
that suicide has been proved; the other essential
ingredient constituting the offence under Section 306,
viz, abetment cannot also be said to have been proved."
Therefore, the judgment and order of acquittal
recorded by the learned trial Judge needs reconsideration.
5. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. J.G.
Panchal for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. Mihir H. Pathak
for the respondent No. 3 supported the judgment and order of
acquittal with the submission that all the evidence recorded
has been correctly appreciated.
5.1 The examination of PW-3 and PW-4 and
examination of PW-5 - Executive Magistrate at Exhibit-17 (Page
105) is appropriately appreciated by the trial Court. More so, in
the dying declaration as well as in the FIR filed, there is no
direct allegation of involvement of accused Nos. 1 and 2.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
5.2 Moreover, in relation to accused No. 3 also, there is
nothing in close proximity, which has resulted into incident of
committal of suicide. No harassment from accused No. 3 -
husband has been pointed out even in the dying declaration, at
Exhibit-19 or the FIR at Exhibit-27. Therefore, since the learned
trial Court has appreciated the correct facts and evidence on
record, it does not require any interference by this Court.
6. This Court has minutely perused the oral as well as
documentary evidence on record and has gone through the
impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions
Judge (Chief Court), Gandhinagar, as well as the paper-book
and evidence produced by the prosecution in its entirety and
also considered the submissions made by learned APP for the
appellant - State and learned advocates for the respondents.
6.1 Upon perusal of the evidence on record, it is noticed
that, in the dying declaration, the deceased has alleged that
the incident had occurred one month prior, the allegation
against accused Nos. 1 and 2 was that they were verbally
abusing and extending criminal threats of death to the
complainant and her family, creating an atmosphere of
intimidation and fear. However, no such recent incident in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
close proximity in time occurred on the date of incident has
been recorded. Moreover, the version referred to in the dying
declaration (At Exhibit-19) and the examination of Executive
Magistrate (At Exhibit-17) is identical. Further, the
consciousness of the deceased at the time of dying declaration
as also at the time of lodging of the FIR cannot be disputed as
considered by the learned trial Judge. Even the Doctor has
confirmed that when the dying declaration was taken, the
complainant - deceased was conscious. This fact is being once
again supported by the certificate of the Doctor, nothing
contrary is coming out from the cross-examination of PW-5 -
Executive Magistrate - Prahladbhai Kemabhai Parmar, who is
an independent Government witness.
6.2 Moreover, from the examination of PW-3 - Ushaben
Natwarbhai Prajapati (Daughter of the deceased), nothing
contrary came out and she has stated that prior to one month,
the quarrel occasioned with accused Nos. 1 and 2. No recent
incident has been recorded, as coming out from the
examination of PW-3. However, no allegation is made against
her father, i.e. accused No. 3 - husband of the deceased,
except some relationship with accused No. 2 - Mayaben.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
6.3 Further, from the examination of PW-4 - Anitaben
Natwarbhai Prajapati (another Daughter of the deceased), it is
noticed that she also confirmed some quarrel with accused
Nos. 1 and 2 took place prior to one month of the incident.
However, no allegation is made against her father, i.e. accused
No. 3 - husband of the deceased, except some relationship
with accused No. 2 - Mayaben.
Thus, there is nothing contrary came out from the
cross-examination of PW-3 and PW-4.
6.4 Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the
allegations against accused Nos. 1 to 3 overall are of abuse
and extending criminal threats of death to the complainant
and her family by creating an atmosphere of intimidation and
fear. Therefore, despite such provocation, no remedial action
was taken by the accused persons. On the day of occurrence,
being mentally distressed and emotionally aggrieved by the
continued mental cruelty, emotional neglect, and suspected
adulterous conduct of her husband, the complainant, in a fit of
rage and despair, poured kerosene upon herself from a
container kept in the kitchen and attempted self-immolation by
igniting a matchstick. In the opinion of this Court, this finding
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
having been recorded by the trial Court based on appreciation
of evidence and there is nothing contrary to disbelieve the
same.
6.5 Moreover, as recorded by the trial Court, immediate
intervention by the family members and neighbours possibly
prevented further grievous injury, which cannot be ignored.
The complainant attributes her deteriorated mental condition
and suicidal attempt to persistent domestic cruelty and
abetment by her husband, coupled with the unlawful influence
and provocation by Mayaben and her husband - Ravibhai could
not be proved by the prosecution.
6.6 Therefore, in the facts of present case, as can be
seen, the prosecution failed in establishing its case in relation
to the charges leveled against accused Nos. 1 to 3. The charge
leveled against accused Nos. 1 to 3 are failed to be proved on
basis of the deposition of prosecution witnesses, more
particularly PW-3 Exhibit-15 (Page 93), PW-4 Exhibit-16 (Page
99) and independent witness PW-5, Exhibit-17 (Page 105).
6.7 The decision of the Honourable Supreme Court
relied on by the learned APP in the case of Kumar @ Shiva
Kumar (Supra) in support of his submission is of no help to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/528/2012 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2025
undefined
the appellant - State as; if the facts and the evidence of this
case are compared then this is not a case where any evidence
is found on the basis of which the respondents - accused can
be held guilty of abetting the suicide of the deceased, more
particularly when no evidence is found that accused have
instigated the deceased resulting into committal of suicide.
7. Therefore, on overall analysis of the aforesaid
evidence on record, the learned trial Judge has rightly recorded
the finding of acquittal in favor of the respondents - accused in
his well-reasoned judgment and order, and thereby, rightly
acquitted them, which calls for no interference by this Court.
8. This Court is, therefore, in complete agreement with
the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of
acquittal recorded by the Court and hence, finds no reason to
interfere with the same.
9. In the result, the present appeal is hereby
dismissed. Record and Proceedings be sent back to the trial
Court forthwith.
(MAUNA M. BHATT, J.)
Raj
