Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1944 (GUJ)

State of Gujarat v. Navneetbhai Karshanbhai Koli

2016-09-06

R.P.DHOLARIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : R.P DHOLARIA, J. The appellant State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal under section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 15.2.2006 rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Navsari in Sessions Case No. 38 of 2005. 2. The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that deceased Nimishaben was married to the respondent accused around three years prior to the date of incident. It is alleged that when deceased Nimishaben used to visit her parental house, she used to complain about the behaviour of the respondent accused who used to physically abused the deceased on trivial issues. It is alleged that once the deceased conceived pregnancy, the respondent accused used to harass her by making allegation about her chastity. It is alleged that prior to the date of incident, the respondent accused physically abused the deceased. It is alleged that on 1.5.2005, the complainant received the information that his daughter was ill and hence, he immediately rushed to the matrimonial house of the deceased where he found his daughter expired and on her neck there was faint impression. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged against the respondent accused. 3. In pursuance of the complaint, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and filed the charge sheet against the respondent accused. The charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. 4. In order to bring home the guilt, the prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced documentary evidences. 5. At the end of the trial, after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of the CrPC and hearing the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the defence, learned trial Court delivered the judgment and order, as stated above. 6. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant State has preferred the aforesaid Criminal Appeal before this Court. 7. By way of preferring the present appeal, the appellant has mainly contended that learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record and wrongly recorded the order of acquittal. 6. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant State has preferred the aforesaid Criminal Appeal before this Court. 7. By way of preferring the present appeal, the appellant has mainly contended that learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record and wrongly recorded the order of acquittal. It is further contended that learned trial Judge has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and in fact, there was no appreciation of evidence so far and hence, the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is required to be reversed, as such. 8. Mr. L.B Dabhi, learned APP appearing for the appellant State has reiterated and urged the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal. Learned APP has taken this Court through the paper-book and evidence on record and argued that though the complainant as well as other witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution, learned trial Court has wrongly acquitted the respondent accused. In his submission, learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record and wrongly recorded the judgment of acquittal which is required to be reversed and the respondent is required to be convicted, as such. 9. On the other-hand, Mr. Gaurav Goyal, learned advocate for Mr. Rushabh Shah, learned advocate for the respondent accused has taken this Court through the entire evidence on record and submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial Judge is just and proper. Mr. Goyal further submitted that the case was initially registered as Accidental Case, at that time, though the police as well as the present respondent ascertained the fact from the complainant as well as parents of the deceased, they did not object, but thereafter, after about two days, the complaint was lodged before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, inter alia, pleading the fact that on being asked to the respondent as regards as to what has happened and as to why the deceased has committed suicide, the respondent was not replying anything, but the neighbour told the complainant that deceased Nimisha and the respondent were quarreling and the respondent used to beat her, due to which, the deceased has committed suicide in order to relieve from the harassment of her husband and also made certain other allegations. He, therefore, submitted that in view of the evidence on record, it cannot be said that the learned trial Judge has committed any error in passing the impugned order acquitting the accused, and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. 10. This Court has heard Mr. L.B Dabhi, learned APP for the appellant State and Mr. Goyal, learned advocate for the respondent accused. 11. This Court has minutely gone through the impugned judgment rendered by learned trial Court as well as the evidence on record in the nature of paper book. On going through the entire material available on record, there appears no dispute as regards to the fact that deceased Nimisha has committed suicide by hanging herself and her such act is also proved to be suicidal upon the evidence of medical officer as well as other witnesses. The only question arises, whether the deceased has committed suicide due to harassment extended by the respondent and due to continuously beating her and whether the deceased has taken that act or not. On that aspect, initially, the complainant himself though he is father of the deceased allowed the case to be registered as Accidental Death case and he participated in the post death ceremonies as well as initially informing the police as regards the incident in the presence of other family members. However, thereafter, as narrated above, the complainant got certain information from the neighbour that the deceased was being continuously beaten by the present respondent and in order to free from continuous harassment of the respondent, the deceased has resorted to the suicidal act and, therefore, the complainant has lodged the complaint. 12. 8.1 However, on going through the entire Record and Proceedings, it appears that nowhere the prosecution has examined any such neighbour indicating the aforesaid fact either before learned trial Court or before the police. Indisputably, the complaint appears to have been lodged upon the strength of assertions made by the neighbour regarding beating by the respondent to the deceased, due to which, she has committed suicide. However, the said fact is not getting any support from the mouth of such neighbour. Therefore, admittedly, the complaint is made on the strength of such statement which becomes hearsay, even which is not getting any support. Under the circumstances, learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent accused considering the nature of evidence on record. 13. However, the said fact is not getting any support from the mouth of such neighbour. Therefore, admittedly, the complaint is made on the strength of such statement which becomes hearsay, even which is not getting any support. Under the circumstances, learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent accused considering the nature of evidence on record. 13. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeals, the appellate Court is not required to rewrite the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper. 14. In above view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that learned trial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent of the charges leveled against him. This Court finds that the findings recorded by learned trial court are absolutely just and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by it. This Court is, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by learned court below and hence finds no reasons to interfere with the same. 15. In the result, this appeal fails and accordingly, it is dismissed. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. R & P to be sent back to the trial Court, forthwith.