Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Mukeshbhai Melabhai Gohel on 7 January, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2277 of 2006
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
MUKESHBHAI MELABHAI GOHEL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS CHETANA SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR DR BHATT(165) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 07/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present appeal is filed under Section
378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(for short "the Cr.P.C.") against the judgement
and order passed in Sessions Case No.99 of 2006
dated 16.09.2006 by the learned Presiding
Officer, 7th Fast Track Court, Nadiad, wherein and
whereby all the accused were acquitted for the
offences punishable under Sections 306, 498A,
304B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for
short "the IPC") and Section 4 of the Prevention
of Dowry Act, 1961 (for short "the Dowry Act").
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell and
as per the Charge at Exh.1 is that the deceased,
who was the daughter of PW-8-Govindbhai Sanabhai,
committed suicide on 11.02.2006 at around 18:00
hrs. due to demand of Rs.10,000/- by the accused
and also physical as well as mental harassment
meted out to her.
3. The complaint dated 12.02.2006 at Exh.19 has
been registered by the uncle of the deceased
(brother of PW-8). It is alleged in the F.I.R.
that the accused used to demand Rs.10,000/- from
the deceased and also she was physically
assaulted as well as mentally harassed, which
ultimately led her to take extreme step of
committing suicide. The trial Court, after
examining 11 witnesses as well as documentary
evidence, has acquitted the accused from the
offence.
4. Learned APP Ms.Shah has submitted that the
impugned judgement and order passed by the trial
Court is required to be quashed and set aside as
the trial Court has failed to appreciate a very
important aspect that the deceased had committed
suicide within a span of 2 years from her
marriage and hence, presumption under Section
113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short
"the Evidence Act") ought to have been drawn
against the accused. She has referred to the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
testimony of 3 important witnesses i.e. (i) PW-7-
complainant (uncle of the deceased) viz.
Ishwarbhai Sanabhai, who is examined at Exh.18,
(ii) PW-8-father of the deceased viz. Govindbhai
Sanabhai, who is examined at Exh.20; and (iii)
PW-9-mother of the deceased viz. Revaben
Govindbhai, who is examined at Exh.21. She has
submitted that the evidence of all these
witnesses corroborate with the facts and it
emerges from their evidence that the accused used
to harass the deceased by demanding Rs.10,000/-
as dowry and also physically assaulted her. Thus,
it is urged that the judgement and order of
acquittal passed by the trial Court may be
quashed and set aside.
5. We have examined the evidence threadbare and
the judgement and order passed by the trial
Court acquitting the respondent-accused. It is
the case of the prosecution, as per the charge at
Exh.1, that the deceased, who is the daughter of
PW-8-Govindbhai Sanabhai and PW-9-Revaben
Govindbhai, committed suicide on 11.02.2006 at
18:00 hrs. by plunging into a well at the village
of the accused due to harassment meted out to
her, both physically and mentally and also due to
demand of Rs.10,000/- as dowry from her.
6. The F.I.R. is registered on 12.02.2006 by the
uncle of the deceased (brother of PW-8). He has
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
categorically stated that for the initial first
year, the accused did not harass the deceased,
but after a lapse of 1 year, they have started
harassing her and demanded Rs.10,000/- from her
parents. It is alleged that the accused also
physically assaulted the deceased and
accordingly, she returned at her parental home
twice, but she was sent back by him and her
father. He has stated in the complaint that he
was informed about the incident by the accused
No.1-husband of the deceased that the deceased,
who went to gather grass from the field in the
morning at 10:00 hrs., but did not return till
17:00 hrs. and hence, all of them went to search
her and near a well, they found cut grass and
scythe as well as slippers however, they were
unable to find out her, and hence they returned.
Thereafter, in the morning i.e. on 12.02.2006,
when they again saw in the well, they found the
dead body lying in the well and, accordingly he
has registered the F.I.R..
7. From the cross-examination of PW-7-
complainant (uncle of the deceased), it is
elicited that after the incident had occurred,
his family members had deliberated upon the
incident and accordingly, it was decided to
register the F.I.R. against in-laws of the
deceased and thereafter, the F.I.R. of demand of
Rs.10,000/- was registered by them. It is further
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
elicited from him that relationship between the
accused No.1 i.e. husband and the deceased was
very cordial and on the contrary, the accused
No.1 used to work in the factory and was earning
well. The cross-examination was also done with
regard to the scene of offence i.e. well and from
his deposition, it is elicited that there was no
fencing of the well and the land (field) was at
the level of the well. Thus, from his deposition,
it is manifest that well, which was situated in
the field, was not having any boundary/ fencing
and it was at the level of the field, and there
was surrounding grass. From the deposition of
this witness, it is established that relationship
between the accused No.1 and the deceased was
cordial and there was no harassment meted out to
her.
8. The very first statement made by PW-8-father
of the deceased examined at Exh.20 in his
examination-in-chief in the trial Court is that
"everything was fine in her matrimonial home". He
has stated that the in-laws of the deceased used
to demand money from his daughter and also used
to assault her however, in the same breath, he
has asserted that the in-laws were not harassing
the deceased. The evidence of this witness
appears to be in contradistinction since in his
cross-examination also, it is elicited from him
that relationship between the accused No.1 and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
the deceased was very cordial. He has further
stated that the accused No.1-husband was earning
very well as he was working since 6 months in the
factory and was drawing handsome salary. It is
also deposed by him that after consultation with
the other family members and elders and on their
direction, it was decided to register the F.I.R.
against the in-laws of the deceased. He has also
admitted that the accused No.1 used to come along
with his daughter for inquiring about his health.
After meeting her mother, she used to return with
the accused No.1 at her matrimonial home. He has
admitted that along with his family members, he
went to the Police Station to register the F.I.R.
9. PW-9-mother of the deceased, who is examined
at Exh.21, has referred about demand of
Rs.10,000/- by the in-laws and in her
examination-in-chief, she has deposed that the
accused did not do anything else. It is elicited
in her cross-examination that the relationship
between her daughter and the in-laws were very
cordial and all of them used to visit their home.
10. A combined reading of all the evidence of 3
vital witnesses of the prosecution reveals that
they have placed reliance on demand of
Rs.10,000/- by the accused, but the same is not
proved by any convincing evidence except a bald
statement. The father of the deceased has not
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
referred to the amount of Rs.10,000/-. The
evidence also reveals that the accused No.1 was
earning handsomely. It is also revealed that the
accused No.1 as well as the deceased, used to
visit her parental home for inquiring about
health of her father and used to return at her
matrimonial home, and their relationship was also
cordial.
11. The F.I.R. is also registered, after due
deliberation and amount of Rs.10,000/- appears to
be fixed after discussion of the family members.
For the span of 2 years of marriage, there is
nothing on record to show that any demand of
dowry was made from the deceased by the accused.
It is further curious to note that though the
father had gone along with the complainant and
other family members, he did not register the
F.I.R. but the same was registered by the uncle
of the deceased i.e. PW-7 (brother of PW-8).
12. Thus, it appears that the story of demand of
dowry and physical harassment and torture has
been concocted and ultimately, the F.I.R. has
been registered.
13. The scene of offence panchnama at Exh.10 as
well as the evidence of the complainant reveal
that there was no fencing around the well and it
was parallel to the field, and was surrounded
with grass. Since scythe as well as cut grass
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2277/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/01/2025
undefined
and slippers were present near the well, in all
probabilities, it was an accidental death. No
investigation in this regard has been done. Thus,
on an overall appreciation of the facts and
evidence, which has been established on record,
it appears that the F.I.R. has been registered,
after due deliberation and attempt has been made
to rope the accused in the offence by levelling
false accusation of demand of dowry of
Rs.10,000/-.
14. Hence, we do not find any convincing reason
to interfere with the judgement and order of
acquittal of the trial Court acquitting the
accused from the offence, for which they were
charged.
15. Appeal being sans merit, is hereby dismissed.
Registry to send back the Record and
proceedings to the concerned Court.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J)
NVMEWADA/S-1-4
