Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1473 (GUJ)

State of Gujarat v. Dilipbhai Dhanjibhai Pipalia

2016-07-25

ANANT S.DAVE, B.N.KARIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Anant S. Dave, J. 1. This appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by the appellant-State, against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.5, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.139 of 2003, whereby the respondents are acquitted from the charge of offence levelled against them punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 and 114 of I.P.C. 2. As per the complaint given by the complainant Kalubhai Naranbhai Rakholiya on 20.04.2003, when eldest daughter named Renukaben who was married with accused No. 1 Dilipbhai Dhanjibhai Pipaliya on 26.05.2002 and living in a joint family with her husband, father-in-law A-3, A-4 Mother-in-law, A-2 brother-in-law and other elder brother-in-law and sister-in-law, died due to hanging. On the eve of 15.04.2003 around 17:00, the complainant received information that his daughter was sick, and therefore, he along with his wife went to matrimonial home of their daughter where, father-in-law of Renukaben told them that Renuka had hanged herself and was taken to the Civil Hospital. Soon thereafter, the complainant and his wife also went to civil hospital, where they saw the dead body of their daughter. The complainant and his wife were taken aback and broke down due to shock on seeing dead body of their daughter. On the next morning, post mortem was arranged and even they had attended the cremation of their daughter arranged by her in-laws. In addition to the above, the case of complainant is that of harassment of Renukaben, both mentally and physically for about six months and for not doing the household work she was insulted often and reprimanded for not cooking well. That daughter of the complainant was not allowed to visit her parental home, not even on the days of festival etc. Thus, harassment was meted out to her by her in-laws. Even allegations were levelled against in-laws about demanding Rs. 25,000/- towards dowry from her parents, when marriage of younger brother-in-law of Renukaben was arranged. 3. Thus, in brief the case of the complainant was of causing physical and mental cruelty, demand of dowry and harassment to their daughter and tired of all such incidences and conduct on the part of the in-laws, Renukaben had committed suicide by hanging herself on 15.04.2003. 4. At the end of Investigation, charge sheet was filed and after making an inquiry under Section 174 of the Cr. 4. At the end of Investigation, charge sheet was filed and after making an inquiry under Section 174 of the Cr. P.C. the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, committed the case for Sessions trial, which was registered as Sessions Case No. 139/2003, in which charge was framed against the accused under Sections 498-A, 306, 304-B and 114 of IPC. The trial Court examined total 13 prosecution witnesses, which included medical as well Police witnesses and 36 documentary evidences. At the end of the trial and upon appreciation and consideration of the above evidences, the learned trial judge found that prosecution has miserably failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, and accordingly, ordered acquittal from the charge of above offences. 5. Learned APP, while assailing the order of acquittal has taken us to testimonies of all prosecution witnesses, including medical and police witnesses and other documentary evidences namely P.M. Report, Inquest Panchnama of the deceased and Panchnama of the place of offence and other medical records along with police statements of almost all witnesses including relatives of the deceased and submitted that the complaint given by the complainant i.e. PW-1 who is the father of the deceased, is fully corroborated by other Pws namely PW-2, 4, 5 and 8 and also about illegal demand of dowry and harassment to the deceased emerge on record. The contents of the complaint, thus, stands proved. It is submitted that, in case if minor contradictions or discrepancies appear in the testimonies of Pws, the same is not to be discarded on the ground that the witnesses happens to be close relatives of the deceased. Even medical evidence appearing on record ought to have been appreciated and considered in the back drop of case of the prosecution that daughter of the complainant had committed suicide on 15.04.2003, as a result of continuous torture, harassment and mental as well as physical cruelty coupled with demand of dowry. All of the above, it is submitted that the span of marriage life of the deceased with A-1 was only 11 months and 9 days, and the incident had taken place at the matrimonial home of the victim. Hence, presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act would apply. All of the above, it is submitted that the span of marriage life of the deceased with A-1 was only 11 months and 9 days, and the incident had taken place at the matrimonial home of the victim. Hence, presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act would apply. When, case of the prosecution is also supported by the concerned Investigating Officer, the order of acquittal of respondents-accused has resulted into miscarriage of justice warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its appellate power by setting aside the same and punishing the respondents-accused in accordance with law. 6. Mr. Hemant Prachchhak, learned counsel for the defence and original-accused would, however, contend that in absence of any error either on law or on fact by the learned trial judge in acquitting the respondents of the charge, for which offences were registered under Section 498-A, 306, 304-B and 114 of IPC after careful analysis, appreciation and consideration on record no material was found linking the respondents/original accused with the guilt since duty is cast upon the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and in the facts of this case, neither oral nor documentary evidences led by the prosecution supported its case, and therefore, benefit of doubt given by the learned trial judge acquitting the respondents deserves no interference and the appeal is to be rejected accordingly. 7. We have considered the submissions made by the learned APP as well learned counsel for the respondents, record of the case including the judgment and order of acquittal under challenge and found that medical witness PW-7 namely Jignaben Dave in her testimony in no uncertain terms states that no injury marks were seen on the body of the person of deceased and fracture and hyoid bone is possible by hanging and what was seen by her was a ligature mark, 2 cm around neck, 1 cm above thyroid cartilage directed to back position etc., and cause of death was cardio respiratory arrest due to asphyxia due to hanging. The above P.M. Report is dated 15.04.2003. No doubt, the span of marriage life was 11 months and a few days, but, testimonies of complainant, his wife and son and other relatives reveal that Renukaben-the deceased was taken due care by her in laws even by providing her proper treatment to her ailment and X-ray report taken at Exh. The above P.M. Report is dated 15.04.2003. No doubt, the span of marriage life was 11 months and a few days, but, testimonies of complainant, his wife and son and other relatives reveal that Renukaben-the deceased was taken due care by her in laws even by providing her proper treatment to her ailment and X-ray report taken at Exh. 41 would go to show that she was referred to a specialist. Her case was of disease related to heart. Even certain facts emerge from the record about Renukaben visiting her parental home as and when required and even on festivals and no grievance was made by Renukaben. Renukaben was conferred an honour at the time of marriage of Pravinbhai i.e. the brother-in-law, when she was allowed to perform certain rituals ordinarily not forming the part of such practice. Even the items of jewellery and 'stree dhan' were immediately returned without any demur by in-laws. All this would go collectively to show the nature and manner in which Renukaben was treated by her in-laws. Besides, the father-in-law, immediately on 15.04.2003 informed the 'B' Division Police Station, Rajkot City about the unfortunate incident. Simultaneously, parents of the deceased were informed, who rushed at the matrimonial home of their daughter and were taken to the civil hospital, where dead body of the deceased was lying and post mortem was to be performed. Certain facts which also emerge on record about the statements of the complainant, though, not forming the part is that improvement appears on record in testimonies i.e. of Kalubhai and Savitaben. Investigating Officer also confirms initially about the investigation carried out for accidental death. The cremation and other ceremony after death of the daughter were attended and even during inquiry held under Section 174 of the Cr. P.C. no grievance what so ever was made with regard to ill treatment of their daughter Renukaben. It is the fact that after 5 days, complaint was lodged, since initially, an accidental death was reported. Even in presence of concerned D.C.P. and Police Inspector who visited the dead body at the Civil hospital and inquired about no complaint was made, no grievances were raised. It is the fact that after 5 days, complaint was lodged, since initially, an accidental death was reported. Even in presence of concerned D.C.P. and Police Inspector who visited the dead body at the Civil hospital and inquired about no complaint was made, no grievances were raised. Coupled with the above and along with the Preliminary Investigation carried out by police authorities, it surfaces on record that relationship of in-laws and daughter of complainant with parents and other relatives of Renukaben appear to be cordial and all members and all relatives of Renukaben were invited at the time of marriage ceremony of younger brother-in-law namely Pravinbhai. On another occasion on inaugural ceremony of garage for sale and repairing of motor bikes of younger brother-in-law, all parental relatives of Renukaben were invited. Before a few days ago, Renukaben, her husband, in-laws and parents had gone on excursion in the district of Junagadh and all of them had enjoyed the tour. The demand of Rs. 25,000/- at the time of marriage of Pravinbhai, younger brother-in-law of deceased, therefore, appears to be a false allegation and whatever is stated in subsequent statements recorded by the Investigating Officer is nothing but an after thought. Further, facts emerge on record that at no point of time the deceased Renukaben had complained about any ill treatment to her by in laws. A striking contradiction appear about PW-8 Savitaben, mother of the deceased about suspecting murder of her daughter, for which no statement was made initially and the investigation was based on two theories namely murder of daughter of the complainant for dowry demand and suicide out of cruelty and also dowry demand by in-laws. No material exist on record to believe either of the case and the trial Court having appreciated and considered all relevant documents and testimonies of prosecution witnesses in the back drop of complaint and statement recorded by the police, came to the conclusion that no material was found to connect the accused with the crime. We are of the considered opinion that the Court below has not committed any error in acquitting the respondents-accused persons of the charge levelled against them. We are in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at by the Court below in the impugned judgment, and therefore, find no reason to entertain this appeal. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. We are in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at by the Court below in the impugned judgment, and therefore, find no reason to entertain this appeal. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 31.12.2005, passed by the learned Presiding-Officer, Fast Track Court No.5, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.139 of 2003, is confirmed. Bail bonds, if any, stands cancelled. Records and proceedings, if lying here, be sent to the Court below forthwith.