Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Hemendra Harishbhai Lodhiya on 2 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 228 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
HEMENDRA HARISHBHAI LODHIYA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 02/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH
ROY)
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 30/10/2012
passed in Sessions Case No.16 of 2010 on the file of the
learned District and Sessions Judge, Porbandar whereby the
respondents-accused were acquitted of the charges for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 304(B), 306 and
114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased by
name Palakben (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') is
the legally wedded wife of A-1. Their marriage was
solemnized on 08/02/2004. They are blessed with one baby
girl during their lawful wedlock. It is stated that after the
marriage, her husband who is A-1 and his family members
who are A-2 to A-6 who are all his parents and sisters etc.
have subjected her to cruelty by harassing her. So, unable to
bear the said harassment that she has committed suicide by
consuming acid on 20/05/2006 at 8:30 p.m. in the house of the
accused. Thereafter, she was taken to the hospital and
postmortem examination was held over her dead body. The
doctor opined that she died because of cardiac respiratory
failure due to taking poison. Her father who is examined as
PW-8, lodged a report with the police and it was registered as
a case under Sections 498(A), 304(B), 306 of the Indian Penal
Code against the accused. It was investigated and on
completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
3. In the trial court, charges under Sections 498(A), 304(B),
306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against
the accused. They denied the charges and claimed to be
tried.
4. During the course of the trial, the prosecution got
examined PW-1 to PW-20 witnesses and got marked 26
exhibits to substantiate its case against the accused.
5. At the end of the trial, after considering the evidence on
record and on appreciation of the same, the trial court found
the accused not guilty for the aforesaid offences and acquitted
them of the said charges.
6. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the
State has preferred the present appeal challenging the
legality and validity of the said judgment of acquittal.
7. When the appeal came up for hearing, we have heard
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya for the appellant-State and
learned advocate Mr. Viral Vyas appearing for learned
advocate Mr.Ashish Dagli for the respondents-accused.
8. The marital relationship between A-1 and the deceased
is not in dispute. Their marriage was solemnized on
08/02/2004. The fact that the deceased committed suicide on
20/05/2006 is also not in controversy. Therefore, admittedly,
her suicidal death took place within seven years of her
marriage. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused
have subjected her to cruelty and harassed her and unable to
bear the said harassment that she committed suicide and died
on 26/08/2006.
9. It is well settled law that in order to prove the case
under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code, relating to a
dowry death, it must be shown that (1) the female person died
either because of burn injuries or any bodily injuries or under
unnatural circumstances, (2) the said death must be within
seven years of marriage and (3) soon before her death, it must
be shown that she was harassed for dowry or in connection
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
with any demand for dowry.
10. In the instant case, although it is the specific case of the
prosecution that the accused have harassed the deceased
demanding money from her, there is absolutely no evidence
on record to prove that she was subjected to any such
harassment by the accused with any demand for money as
alleged by the prosecution. All the material witnesses who
are examined as PW-8, PW-9 to PW-13, who are the father of
the deceased, maternal uncle of the deceased and his wife and
brother of the deceased and paternal aunt of the deceased
including PW-12, the neighbour of the accused turned hostile
to the prosecution case and did not support the prosecution
case. None of them including the father of the deceased
deposed that the accused harassed the deceased for money or
dowry or for any valuable security or property.
11. It is only PW-18, who is the mother of the deceased, has
stated that the accused harassed the deceased but she also
did not depose that the said harassment was in connection
with any demand for dowry or money. She only stated that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
she was harassed. But the details relating to the said
harassment and whether the said harassment is in connection
with the dowry or for money is not stated by her. It is only a
vague allegation. Therefore, her evidence is also not of any
use for the prosecution to establish that the deceased was
subjected to any cruelty or harassment for dowry or in
connection with the dowry. So, there is no valid evidence on
record to establish the said material fact to prove an offence
under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code or under
Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
12. Even though the deceased has left a suicide note and her
dying declaration is also recorded by the Executive
Magistrate, there is nothing to indicate either in the said
suicide note or in the dying declaration that she was harassed
for dowry or in connection with any dowry or valuable
security or property by the accused. It is only stated by her
that there used to be a regular quarrel between her and the
accused relating to food and other household issues. It is
settled law that every petty quarrel, family bickerings which
are usual in any family life by itself cannot be construed as a
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
harassment caused for dowry or in connection with the dowry
or for any property. Therefore, even the suicide note and the
dying declaration of the deceased is also not proving or
establishing the fact that she was subjected to any such
harassment or cruelty for or in connection with the dowry as
required under the law to prove the offences under Sections
304 (B) and 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The necessary
legal requirements to prove the said offences are not
established in this case.
13. If a married woman commits suicide on account of usual
family bickerings and petty quarrels that take place in the
family, either because of her weak mind or emotional nature,
the family members of the matrimonial home cannot be held
responsible for any offences punishable under Sections 304(B)
or 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
14. The facts of the case do not even constitute any offence
punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code also.
Admittedly, there is no intentional instigation or aid given by
the accused as required under Section 107 of the Indian Penal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
Code to constitute an offence of abetment to commit suicide
by the deceased. Even to invoke the presumption under
Section 113(A) of the Evidence Act, it must be shown that she
was subjected to harassment or cruelty for or in connection
with any dowry or valuable security or property. As discussed
supra, the said material fact is not proved in this case.
Therefore, no such presumption can be invoked that she
committed suicide because of any such harassment said to
have been caused to her by the accused. Therefore, the
offence under Section 306 is also not proved in this case.
15. Upon considering the evidence on record and on proper
appreciation of the same, the trial court arrived at a right
conclusion and acquitted the accused.
16. Upon re-appraisal of the said evidence, we are also of
the view that no case is made out for any of the said charges
against the accused. So the impugned judgment of the trial
court cannot be disturbed and it warrants any interference in
this appeal. So, the appeal fails and liable to be dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/228/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
17. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed confirming the
judgment of the acquittal of the trial court. Bail bond of the
accused, if any, shall stand discharged.
18. Record and proceedings be sent back forthwith to the
concerned court.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
ILA
