Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Bhaveshkumar @ Devendra Parshuram ... on 20 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1758 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
BHAVESHKUMAR @ DEVENDRA PARSHURAM CHAUDHARI &
ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 20/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State
under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the judgment and the
order dated 18.03.2008 in Sessions Case No.85 of 2007 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1,
Surendranagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial
Court'), whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
respondents - accused from the offences punishable under
Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter
referred to as 'the IPC'). The respondents are hereinafter referred
to as 'the accused' as they stood in the rank and file in the original
case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present
appeal are as under:
2.1. The accused No.1 was married to the deceased
Rupaliben on 26.04.2007 and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the
brother-in-law and sister-in-law and the accused Nos. 4 and 5 are
the father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased Rupaliben
respectively. The complainant Narayan Devram Chaudhari, the
father of deceased Rupaliben, filed a complaint on 30.06.2007
stating that he had received a phone call from Yashwantbhai
Chaudhari and he along with his wife and the other family
members left from Khedgam, Taluka Chalisgam, District Jalgaon,
Maharashtra State and came to Ahmedabad on 29.06.2007 at
around 3:00am to the Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. That all the
accused were present and the post-morterm on the dead body of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
his daughter Rupaliben was done and they concluded the funeral
rites. That they went to Radhey Tenements, Surendranagar and
saw the place of incident and saw that the quilts in the house were
burnt and they found that his daughter Rupaliben had died due to
burn injuries. That all the accused used to mentally harass his
daughter and demand furniture and other articles and money
from her and as she could not bear the torture, , she committed
suicide on 28.06.2007 at Surendranagar and the complaint was
registered on 30.06.2007 at the Surendranagar City Police Station
under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of the IPC, which was
registered at I-C.R.No. 107 of 2007.
3.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was
carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having
sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be
filed before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case
was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions therefore, after
completion of process under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the case
was committed to the Sessions Court and the same was registered
as Sessions Case No.85 of 2007.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
3.3. 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 was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.6 and the
statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs.7 to 11
respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the
charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on
record. The prosecution has examined 16 witnesses and has
produced 33 documentary evidence in support of the case.
3.4 After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned
APP at Exh.69, the further statements of the accused under Section
313 of the Code were recorded. After hearing the arguments of the
learned APP and learned advocate for the accused and after
perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the
impugned judgment and order, has acquitted the accused for the
offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of the IPC.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that
the learned Trial Court has committed grave error on record of the
case as the learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the
oral as well as documentary evidence in its true and proper
perspective. The learned Trial Court has erred in not considering
the ratio laid down by the judgment of the Apex Court which are
applicable to the facts of the present case and the impugned
judgment and order is perverse and suffering from legal and
factual error apparent on the record. The learned Trial Court has
erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to establish the
case beyond the reasonable doubts. The learned Trial Court has,
without giving any specific reason, not discussed the evidence of
the witnesses in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
and has discarded the evidence of the witnesses. The learned Trial
Court has erred in appreciating the fact that the deceased was
being harassed by the accused and was being given mental and
physical torture time and again and the learned Trial Court has not
appreciated the important evidence in its real spirit and has
acquitted the accused. The learned Trial Court has erred in not
considering the evidence of the complainant and other witnesses
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
which was fully supported the case of the prosecution. The learned
Trial Court has passed the impugned judgment and order of
acquittal is without giving any cogent and convincing reasons,
illegal, invalid and improper, and therefore, the same requires to
be quashed and set aside.
5. Heard learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya for the
appellant - State and learned advocate Mr.Viral Vyas for learned
advocate Mr.Ashish Dagli the respondents. Perused the impugned
judgment and order of acquittal and have re-appreciated the entire
evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
6. Learned APP Mr.Bhargav Pandya for the appellant -
State has taken this Court through the entire evidence produced
by the prosecution and has vehemently argued that the learned
Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence properly and the
prosecution has produced cogent evidence to prove the case and
has successfully proved the case against the accused but the
learned Trial Court has not considered the same and has acquitted
the accused. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the
learned Judge is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
of justice. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned
Judge is based on inferences, not warranted by facts of the case
and also on presumptions, not permitted by law. Learned APP
has urged this Court to quash and set aside the impugned
judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused guilty for
the said offence. Learned APP has urged this Court to allow the
present appeal and impose maximum sentence on the accused.
7. Learned advocate Mr.Viral Vyas for the respondents -
original accused has submitted that the learned Trial Court has
appreciated all the evidence in true perspective and has not
committed any error in acquitting the accused. Therefore, no
interference of this Court is required in the impugned judgement
and the order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court and
has urged this Court to reject the appeal.
8. 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 Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of
Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, the Apex Court has
observed as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Recently, in Kallu Vs. 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
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 under the fundamental principle of
criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
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.
9. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against
acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that
no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after
appreciation of the evidence produced before the learned Trial
Court, it appears that there are some manifest illegality or
perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the
Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the
Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of
acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of
innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of
acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e.
(i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in
favour of the accused, should be adopted, and if the trial Court has
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate Court
should not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The Appellate
Court can interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal only
when there are compelling and substantial reasons and the order is
clearly unreasonable and where the Appellate Court comes to
conclusion that based on the evidence, the conviction is a must.
10. The accused has been charged with the offence under
Section 306 of the IPC and at this juncture it would be fit to
reproduce the observations of the Apex Court in the case of
Prakash and others versus State of Maharashtra in the order
passed in Criminal Appeal No.5543 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP
(Cri.) No. 1073 of 2023 on 20 December 2024 in paras 12 to 22
which are as under:
"12. The relevant provisions of the IPC that fall for consideration are
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.
107. Abetment of a thing--A person abets the doing of a
thing, who--
First.-- Instigates any person to do that thing; or
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
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 willful 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."
13. Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of
suicide by one person and second, the abetment to the said act
by another person(s). In order to sustain a charge under Section
306 of the IPC, it must necessarily be proved that the accused
person has contributed to the suicide by the deceased by some
direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or
involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107
of the IPC has to be satisfied.
14. Section 306 read with Section 107 of IPC, has been interpreted,
time and again, and its principles are well- established. To
attract the offence of abetment to suicide, it is important to
establish proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or
incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close
proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such
instigation or incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet
the commission of suicide and should put the victim in such a
position that he/she would have no other option but to commit
suicide.
15. The law on abetment has been crystallised by a plethora of
decisions of this Court. Abetment involves a mental process of
instigating or intentionally aiding another person to do a 10
particular thing. To bring a charge under Section 306 of the IPC,
the act of abetment would require the positive act of instigating
or intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Without such mens rea on the part of the accused person being
apparent from the face of the record, a charge under the
aforesaid Section cannot be sustained. Abetment also requires
an active act, direct or indirect, on the part of the accused
person which left the deceased with no other option but to
commit suicide.
16. This Court in the case of S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar
Mahajan and Another12, had an occasion to consider the scope
of Section 306 of the IPC and the ingredients which are essential
for abetment, as set out in Section 107 of the IPC. It observed as
follows:
16. The word "suicide" in itself is nowhere defined in the
Penal Code, however its meaning and import is well
known and requires no explanation. "Sui" means "self"
and "cide" means "killing", thus implying an act of self-
killing. In short, a person committing suicide must
commit it by himself, irrespective of the means employed
by him in achieving his object of killing himself.
...........
18. In our country, while suicide in itself is not an offence,
considering that the successful offender is beyond the
reach of law, attempt to suicide is an offence under
Section 309 IPC.
..........
21. The learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance
on a judgment of this Court in Mahendra Singh V. State
of M.P. [1995 Supp (3) SCC 731 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 1157] In
Mahendra Singh [1995 Supp (3) SCC 731 : 1995 SCC
(Cri) 1157] the allegations levelled were as under: (SCC p.
731, para 1)
"1. ... My mother-in-law and husband and sister-in-law
(husband's elder brother's wife) harassed me. They
beat me and abused me. My husband Mahendra
wants to marry a second time. He has illicit
connections with my sister-in-law. Because of
these reasons and being harassed I want to die by
burning." The Court on the aforementioned
allegations came to a definite conclusion that by
no stretch the ingredients of abetment are attracted
on the statement of the deceased. According to the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
appellant, the conviction of the appellant under
Section 306 IPC merely on the basis of the
aforementioned allegation of harassment of the
deceased is unsustainable in law.
... ...........
23. In State of W.B. v. Orilal Jaiswal [(1994) 1 SCC 73 : 1994
SCC (Cri) 107] this Court has cautioned that: (SCC p.
90, para 17)
"17. ... The court should be extremely careful in
assessing the facts and circumstances of each case
and the evidence adduced in the trial for the
purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out
to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life
by committing suicide. If it [appears] to the court
that a victim committing suicide was
hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and
12 differences in domestic life quite common to
the society to which the victim belonged and such
petulance, discord and differences were not
expected to induce a similarly circumstanced
individual in a given society to commit suicide,
the conscience of the court should not be satisfied
for basing a finding that the accused charged of
abetting the offence of suicide should be found
guilty."
24. This Court in Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of
NCT of Delhi) [(2009) 16 SCC 605 : (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 367]
had an occasion to deal with this aspect of abetment. The
Court dealt with the dictionary meaning of the words
"instigation" and "goading". The Court opined that there
should be intention to provoke, incite or encourage the
doing of an act by the latter. Each person's suicidability
pattern is different from the other. Each person has his
own idea of self-esteem and self-respect. Therefore, it is
impossible to lay down any straitjacket formula in
dealing with such cases. Each case has to be decided on
the basis of its own facts and circumstances.
25. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a
person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a
thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to
instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio
of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to
convict a person under Section 306IPC 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 that act must have been
intended to push the deceased into such a position that
he committed suicide."
17. This Court held that abetment involves the mental process of
instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of
a thing. Therefore, without a positive act on the part of the
accused to instigate or aid a person in committing suicide,
conviction cannot be sustained. This Court further observed
that the intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases
decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person
under Section 306 of IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to
commit the offence. Abetment also requires an active act or
direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no
other option and that act must have been intended to push the
deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.
However, this Court has cautioned that since each person reacts
differently to the same provocation depending on a variety of
factors, it is impossible to lay down a straightjacket formula to
deal with such cases. Therefore, every such case has to be
decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances.
18. More recently, in the case of Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda
and Others v. State of Gujarat, this Court has relied on S.S.
Chheena (supra) to hold that the element of mens rea cannot
simply be presumed or inferred, instead it must be evident and
explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational
requirement for establishing abetment under the law, that is
deliberate and conspicuous intention to provoke or contribute
to the act of suicide, would remain unfulfilled. This Court
observed as follows:
"18. For a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, it is a well-
established legal principle that the presence of clear mens
rea--the intention to abet the act--is essential. Mere
harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find an accused
guilty of abetting suicide. The prosecution must
demonstrate an active or direct action by the accused that
led the deceased to take his/her own life. The element of
mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the
foundational requirement for establishing abetment
under the law is not satisfied, underscoring the necessity
of a deliberate and conspicuous intent to provoke or
contribute to the act of suicide."
19. It is, therefore, evident that the positive act of instigation is a
crucial element of abetment. While dealing with an issue of a
similar nature, this Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State
of Chhattisgarh laid down the parameters of what would be
constituted to be an act of instigation. This Court observed as
follows:-
"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."
20. It could thus be seen that this Court observed that instigation is
to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an
act". It has been held that in order 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,
however, a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must
be capable of being spelt out. Applying the law to the facts of
the case, this Court went on to hold that a word uttered in the
fit of anger or 16 emotion without intending the consequences
to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
21. Relying on the decision in the case of Ramesh Kumar (supra),
this Court in the case of Ude Singh and Others v. State of
Haryana observed as follows:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
"16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a
proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the
commission of suicide. It could hardly be disputed that
the question of cause of a suicide, particularly in the
context of an offence of abetment of suicide, remains a
vexed one, involving multifaceted and complex attributes
of human behaviour and responses/reactions. In the case
of accusation for abetment of suicide, the court would be
looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of
incitement to the commission of suicide. In the case of
suicide, mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by
another person would not suffice unless there be such
action on the part of the accused which compels the
person to commit suicide; and such an offending action
ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. Whether
a person has abetted in the commission of suicide by
another or not, could only be gathered from the facts and
circumstances of each case.
16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted
commission of suicide by another, the consideration
would be if the accused is guilty of the act of instigation
of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this
Court in the decisions above referred, instigation means
to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do
an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been
hypersensitive and the action of the accused is otherwise
not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly
circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be
safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide.
But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and by
his continuous course of conduct creates a situation
which leads the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the
four corners of Section 306 IPC. If the accused plays an
active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-respect of
the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit
suicide, the accused may be held guilty of abetment of
suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the
accused in such cases would be examined with reference
to the actual acts and deeds of the accused and if the acts
and deeds are only of such nature where the accused
intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of
anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of
abetment of suicide.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
However, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying
the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased
reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of
abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate
analysis of human behaviour, each case is required to be
examined on its own facts, while taking note of all the
surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and
psyche of the accused and the deceased.
16.2. We may also observe that human mind could be affected
and could react in myriad ways; and impact of one's
action on the mind of another carries several
imponderables. Similar actions are dealt with differently
by different persons; and so far a particular person's
reaction to any other human's action is concerned, there is
no specific theorem or yardstick to estimate or assess the
same. Even in regard to the factors related with the
question of harassment of a girl, many factors are to be
considered like age, personality, upbringing, rural or
urban set-ups, education, etc. Even the response to the ill
action of eve teasing and its impact on a young girl could
also vary for a variety of factors, including those of
background, self-confidence and upbringing. 18 Hence,
each case is required to be dealt with on its own facts and
circumstances."
22. It could thus be seen that this Court observed that
in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a
proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the
commission of suicide. It has been held that since the
cause of suicide particularly in the context of the offence
of abetment of suicide involves multifaceted and complex
attributes of human behaviour, the court would be
looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of
incitement to the commission of suicide. This Court
further observed that a mere allegation of harassment of
the deceased by another person would not suffice unless
there is such action on the part of the accused which
compels the person to commit suicide. This Court also
emphasised that such an offending action ought to be
proximate to the time of occurrence. It was further
clarified that the question of mens rea on the part of the
accused in such cases would be examined with reference
to the actual acts and deeds of the accused. It was further
held that if the acts and deeds are only of such nature
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
where the accused intended nothing more than
harassment or a snap-show of 19 anger, a particular case
may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide,
however, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the
deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or
was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment
of suicide. This Court held that owing to the fact that the
human mind could be affected and could react in myriad
ways and that similar actions are dealt with differently by
different persons, each case is required to be dealt with its
own facts and circumstances."
11. In light of the above, the evidence produced by the
prosecution on record is appreciated and the prosecution has
examined PW-1 Rasikbhai Ratilal Joshi at Exh.15 and PW-3
Rahimbhai Hussainbhai Kagathara at Exh.20. Both the witnesses
are the panch witnesses of the panchnama of the place of the
offence produced at Exh.16 and the both the witnesses have stated
that on 30.06.2007, while they were at Jawahar Chowk and near
the Tower respectively, when the police came in the vehicle and
asked them to affix their signatures on the ready panchnama
which is produced at Exh.16. The witnesses have been declared
hostile and have been cross-examined by the learned APP but,
nothing to support the case of the prosecution has come on record.
11.2. The prosecution has examined PW-2 Durgaben
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Govindbhai Satle at Exh.18 and the witness is the panch witness of
the inquest panchnama, which is produced at Exh.19, but, the
witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has
been declared hostile.
11.3 The prosecution has examined PW-4 Narayan Devram
Chaudhari at Exh.21 and the witness has stated that his daughter
Rupaliben was married to the accused No.1 on 26.04.2007 and after
marriage, she was residing at Songir village, District Dhuliya,
Maharashtra State. That she was in her matrimonial home for 15
days after her marriage and they brought her back home and she
stayed at her parental house for 6 days. That her mother-in-law
came and and took her back to the matrimonial house and
demanded an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to construct a house. That
he did not have the money and he told her that he would give it
later on and after three weeks, once again, he went to bring his
daughter and she came back to the parental house. That his
daughter did not have any conversation with him but, used to
converse with her mother and told her mother that her in-laws
were demanding the amount and harassing her. That after 5-6
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
days, the accused No.2 and 3 came and took her and after some
times, he, once again, brought her back to her parental house. That
she went back to village Songir and then, came to Surendranagar
and stayed with her in-laws for 3-4 days and thereafter, she
expired. That he and his wife and all the other relatives came and
found that his daughter had expired and but, he does not know
how she had expired and he saw her dead body at Civil Hospital.
That her in-laws were stating that the incident has occurred as the
gas bottle exploded and her cremation was concluded at
Ahmedabad. The witness has produced a chit written by his
daughter in Marathi language wherein it is stated that her
husband and her mother-in-law would burn her if she did not take
the vessels and money as demanded by them and the chit was
given by his daughter to her mother when she had come on the
last occasion to her parental house. The chit was produced by him
at the Surendranagar Police Station and he had filed the complaint
which is produced at Exh.23. The witness has not supported the
case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile and has been
cross-examined by the learned APP. During the cross-examination
by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
his daughter was engaged as per the rites of his caste and she was
married one week after the engagement. That after the marriage,
his daughter and her husband was residing along in village Songir
and his daughter and son-in-law had come to Surendranagar for a
short visit. That his daughter had never come to his house in anger
from her matrimonial home and in his caste, there is no customs of
dowry. That in his caste, the daughter is sent only with 'red
vermillion' and when he came to Ahmedabad, all the accused
were present at the Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. The witness has
produced a stamp paper, on which, the some writings have been
written at Exh.25 and he has identified his signature on the same.
The witness has stated that his daughter and the accused No.1
liked each other very much and whenever, his daughter wrote a
letter or spoke to him on the telephone she would say that she was
very happy. The notebook produced at Exh.24 is the only book
with the hand writing of his deceased daughter and after the chit
was found, no complaint has been filed with the police station and
when the incident had occurred. his daughter was in
Surendranagar and the chit was at his village. That he brought the
chit and came to Surendranagar and after the marriage, his
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
daughter stayed with the accused No.1 for 15 days. That his
daughter and son-in-law were residing at Khedgam and village
Songir and the other accused were residing at Surendranagar. That
the place where they were residing in Surendranagar is a
residential area and there are the residential houses all around.
11.4. The prosecution has examined PW-5 Uday Abhiman
Chaudhari at Exh.27 and the witness is the brother-in-law of the
deceased. The witness has supported the case of the prosecution
and during the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that the accused did not demand
for any money in his presence but, he had known from his father-
in-law that the money was demanded. That after marriage the
deceased and her husband were residing at village Songir and
other accused were residing at Surendranagar. That after marriage
the deceased had come from village Songir to Khedgam on 2 to 3
occasions and she did not have any conversation with him and the
father-in-law of the deceased had called them and informed them
about the incident.
11.5 The prosecution has examined PW-6 Yashwantbhai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Lotanbhai Chaudhari at Exh.30 and the witness has stated that he
was working in Surendranagar District Police Force and has
retired as an ASI and his daughter was married at Khedgam in
Maharashtra State. That he was at his house and he came to know
about he incident and went to C.J.Hospital, where the deceased
Rupaliben was being treated and was thereafter taken to Civil
Hospital, Ahmedabad for further treatment. The document
produced at Exh.22 is in Marathi language and he had translated
the same in Gujarati. During the cross-examination, the witness
has stated that on the date of the incident, the accused No.4 and 5
were not in Surendranagar and the accused No.2 was at work. The
documents at Exhs. 25 and 26 were executed in the presence of the
relatives and in which, it was mentioned that there was no
harassment from the father-in-law of the deceased. That the
deceased had not visited house and she had not stated that she
had any kind of harassment.
11.6. The prosecution has examined PW-7 Dr.Maheshkumar
Pursottambhai Kapadiya at Exh.31 and the witness is the Medical
Officer, who has performed the post-mortem on the dead body of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
the deceased. That witness has stated that the post-mortem was
performed on 29.06.2007 between 11:05am to 12:05pm and the
dead body had sustained 85% to 90% burns, which was to 2 to 3
degree over body with the area covering head, face, chest and both
arms upto 1/3 of forearm and trunk. Back area had mild burns
and both thighs, private parts, legs except lower legs, both lower
1/3 of legs blisters and readness and blacking of skin. There were
deep burns over the chest, face thigh and abdomen area with deep
muscle involvement and blisters with skin separated with redness
on many parts of the body. There were multiple encircling
contusions present with grip grove about 2.5-2.75cm wide on right
and left legs. Multiple encircling contusions grove like 2.5-2.75 cm
wide with redness and four multiple contusions present over back
of thigh 9X2.0 cm with rail like pattern with redness and multiple
contusions over both the primary inner soles with redness. The
injuries were ante-mortem in nature and the cause of death was
shock due to burns over the body. During the cross-examination,
the witness has stated that the patient was brought from
C.J.Hospital, Surendranagar with bandages over hands and legs
and wrists and they were opened at the time of post-mortem. That
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
when he had opened the bandages, treatment was given on the
wrists and hands and legs and the portion was red in colour.
11.7. PW-8 Vasudevbhai Bhalabhai Bharwad examined at
Exh.37 is the Assistant Examiner of Exchange Documents, who
was working at FSL and had examined the documents sent by the
Investigating Officer. The witness has produced the opinion
regarding the disputed writings marked D/1 and natural writings
marked N/1 to N/6 and NN/1 and NN/6 and has stated that they
were written by the same person. During the cross-examination,
the witness has stated that the police did not record his statement
and the reasons were not in a sealed cover and were with him till
the date of his deposition. That he has not received any degree as
Hand Writing Expert and the hand writings of a young person and
an aged person are different. The writing that he had examined
were the writings of an aged person.
11.8 The prosecution has examined PW-9 Rajesh
Bisangsingh Bagdavat at Exh.45 and the witness has stated that he
was called by the Surat Police at the Surat Railway Police Chowki
where the police from Surendranagar had come and Narayan
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Chaudhari from Surendranagar was present and he had brought a
note-book which was of his deceased daughter and his signature
was taken in the note-book which is produced at Exh.24 The
panchnama by which the note-book was seized is produced is
produced at Exh.46. During the cross-examination, the witness has
stated that when he was called the Surat Police Railway Police
Chowki, a number of persons were present and he had affixed his
signature on the note-book and the panchnama as instructed.
11.9. PW-10 Arunaben Himmatlal Panara examined at
Exh.47 is a PSO, who has registered the offence at Surendranagar
City Police Station being I-C.R.No.107 of 2007. During the cross-
examination, the witness has stated that at the time of registration
of the complaint, the document of Janvajog Entry No.32 of 2007
was not on hand and the panchnama is drawn immediately after
the Accidental Death Case is registered.
11.10. The prosecution has examined PW-11 Kamalbai
Narayan Chaudhari at Exh.51 and the witness is the mother of the
deceased Rupaliben, who has stated that after the marriage of her
daughter Rupaliben with the accused No.1, her daughter was
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
staying at village Songir, and thereafter, she had come to
Surendranagar with her husband and the other accused. They
were informed that the edge of her sari was burnt in the primus
and she had sustained burn injuries and they came to Civil
Hospital, Ahmedabad where her daughter was kept and the final
cremation was perfomed at Ahmedabad. The accused were
residing at Surendranagar and burnt clothes pieces were found at
their house. During the cross-examination, the witness has stated
that at the time of the engagement and marriage, the talk about the
clothes and vessels to be given had taken place and thereafter, no
other dowry was demanded. That after the chit was found they
had sent Rupaliben to her matrimonial home and she had
informed her husband about the chit but her husband did not take
any steps. That her daughter never came back from the
matrimonial house in anger and she had only stated that she was
being harassed.
11.11. The prosecution has examined PW-12 Harunbeg
Husenbeg Mirza at Exh.52 and the witness is the ASI, Shahibaug
Police Station, who has stated that on 28.06.2007, he was on duty at
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Civil Hospital OPD Police Chowki between12:00 to 20:00 hours
and at 18:30 hours PMO Dr. Bhavin Shah informed him that
Rupaliben Bhaveshbhai Chaudhari, aged about 22 years, residing
at Radhe Tenement, Surendranagar was brought for treatment in
burnt condition after taking primary treatment in Surendranagar
and she has expired at 17:45 hours. That she was married for two
months and the inquest panchnama was drawn by the Executive
Magistrate on 29.06.2007 between 9:40 to 10:25 hours and the post-
mortem was conducted by the panel doctors and as the parental
family members of the deceased were not present, the dead body
was kept in the cold room and when her father Narayan Devram
Chaudhari came, he was given the dead body. During the cross-
examination, the witness has stated that he did not have the
papers of Janvajog Entry No.32 of 2007.
11.12. The prosecution has examined PW-13 Kiritbhai
Ramabhai Parmar at Exh. 53 and the witness is the Investigating
Officer, who has stated that Station Diary Entry No. 32 of 2007 was
entered at Surendranagar City Police Station on 28.06.2007 and he
had investigated the same. That he gone to the place of incident
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
and deceased Rupaliben, the wife of Bhaveshkumar Chaudhari,
was at C.J.Hospital, Surendranagar and was thereafter transferred
to Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. That he had recorded the
statements of the neighbours and prepared the panchnama which
is produced at Exh.16. The photographs were taken which are
produced at Exh.36. During the cross-examination, the witness has
stated that the documents of Janvajog Entry were not placed along
with the papers of the offence.
11.13. The prosecution has examined PW-14 Rafiqbhai
Ismailbhai Bhatti at Exh.54 and PW-15 Govindbhai Bavalbhai
Bharwad at Exh.56 and both the witnesses are the panch witnesses
of the panchnama produced at Exh.56, by which, the Investigating
Officer has seized the chit alleged to have been written by the
deceased. Both the witnesses have not supported the case of the
prosecution and have stated that they have merely affixed their
signatures on the ready panchnama and no chit was seized in their
presence. The witnesses have been cross-examined by the learned
APP, but they have not supported the case of the prosecution.
11.14 The prosecution has examined PW-16 Anubha
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
Keshubha Parmar at Exh. 57 and the witness is the Investigating
Officer, who has narrated in detail the entire procedure that was
undertaken during investigation. During the cross-examination,
the witness has stated that all the statements are recorded on the
same day and on the same place and all the statements are similar.
That he did not go to the place of incident and he had recorded the
statements of neighbours but they were not helpful to the case of
the prosecution and hence, the same have not been placed in the
papers of charge sheet. That he had not recorded the statement of
the caste members who had gathered at Ahmedabad and he had
recorded only the statements of the family members of the
deceased. The note-book of the deceased was handed over by the
complainant at Surat and there are no witness who have stated
they had seen the deceased writing and he had not recorded the
statement of any teachers of the deceased. That the note-book has
writings in Marathi language and they were not translated in
Gujarati language.
12. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the
prosecution, as per the case of the complainant, the incident had
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
occurred on 28.06.2007 and the complaint has been filed on
30.06.2007. In the evidence of the complainant and PW-11
Kamalbai, Narayan Chaudhri the mother of the deceased
Rupaliben, it has emerged that the deceased was residing at village
Songir and not at Surendranagar. Immediately after the incident,
the deceased was taken to C.J.Hospital at Surendranagar and was
treated at C.J.Hospital Surendranagar but there are no documents
produced on record to appreciate as to what was stated by the
deceased in the history before the treating doctor and the treating
doctor at Surendranagar has not been examined before the learned
Trial Court. The Janvajog Entry has been produced at Exh.58
which has been given by the accused, wherein, he had stated that
he had taken his jeep and gone to Patadi and while he was at
Patadi in the afternoon, his elder brother telephoned him and
asked him to come home and he found that his wife was burnt and
taken to C.J.Hospital for treatment. It has also emerged on record
that at the time of incident, the deceased was alone at home and
the Accidental Death was registered but no documents about the
Accidental Death and the investigation conducted by the
Investigating Officer regarding the Accidental Death have come on
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
record. The prosecution has not examined any neighbours even
though the statements were recorded and as per the Investigating
Officer PW-13 Kiritbhai Ramabhai Parmar, the neighbours have
not supported the case of the prosecution and hence, their
statements have not been enclosed along with the charge sheet.
The delay in filing the complaint has also not been explained by
the complainant. The chit has been produced by the complainant
PW-4 Narayan Devram Chaudhari on 30.06.2007 and the note-
book has been produced by the complainant on 24.08.2007 at Surat
Railway Police Chowki. There is no explanation as to why the
note-book was produced after almost two months of the accident
and there is no conclusive evidence that the chit and the note-book
are the hand writings of the deceased. Moreover, in the evidence
of PW-11 Kamalbai, the mother of the deceased, it has emerged on
record that the chit was given by the deceased when she had
visited her paternal home and it was given to her father but no
action was taken on the chit and there is no conclusive evidence
that the chit was, in fact, written by the deceased at any point of
time prior to the incident. It has also emerged on record that there
is no custom of dowry in the caste of the complainant and there is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
no evidence that any dowry was in fact demanded or given by the
complainant to the deceased at the time of the marriage. The
Investigating Officer has also stated that the deceased and the
accused No.1 was residing at village Sonagiri and all the accused
were not residing together. In light of the judgment of the Apex
Court in Prakash (Supra), there is no iota of evidence that the
accused immediately preceding the incident had meted out any
cruelty to the victim and that they had intentionally aided or
instigated the deceased to commit suicide. There is no iota of
evidence that the accused were present on the date of incident on
the date of incident or prior to that and after the marriage, it
appears that most of the time, the deceased was residing at her
paternal home and had gone to her maternal home only four days
prior to the incident.
13. In view of the above, 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1758/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified 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.
14. The impugned judgment and the order dated
18.03.2008 in Sessions Case No.85 of 2007 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Surendranagar
is hereby confirmed.
15. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be
sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S.KAZI
