Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 671 (GUJ)

State Of Gujarat v. Bipin Amaratbhai Chauhan

2025-07-05

M.K.THAKKER

body2025
JUDGMENT : M. K. Thakker, J. 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Camp at Kalol in Sessions Case No.40 of 2009 dated 14.09.2009, by which the learned Court has acquitted the respondents of the offence punishable under Section 498A, 306 and 114 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the State has filed the petition under Section 3 78 of the Cr.P.C. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that C.R. No.1-175 of 2008, which came to be lodged before the Kalol City, Police Station under Sections 498A, 306 and 114 of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act by the mother of the deceased, alleging against the husband, father-in-law, mother-in- law and the brother-in-law. It is alleged by the complainant - mother of the deceased that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with accused No.1 on 04.05.2002 and she was staying along with other family members mentioned in the first part of the FIR. On 12.11.2008, at around 7:00 o’clock, the father-in-law of the deceased had called the son of the complainant and informed that the deceased's health was not good, therefore, she was taken to the Umiya hospital and then she was referred to the Sanjeevni Hospital at Nava Vadaj. He was informed to come to the Sanjeevni Hospital. Therefore, the mother had sent her son and son-in-law to the hospital. On reaching to the hospital, it was found that the daughter was unconscious because of consumption of the poison on 12.11.2008 at around 16:30 hours. The reasons for the consumption of the poison, stated in the FIR, that before three years from the date of the incident, there was a baby shower ceremony. At that point of time, the dowry, which was demanded could not be provided by the parents, after 10 days from the date of birth of the daughter, the deceased was sent back to the house of her parents, she stayed for two years and thereafter, on an assurance being provided by the in-law with regard to treating well to the deceased, the deceased was sent back to the matrimonial house. It is alleged that on the occasion of the festival of Deepavali, when the daughter came to the house, she complained again with regard to the demand of dowry and harassment at the ends of the son-in-law. Again, on day of Labh Pancham, she was sent back and thereafter, she consumed the poison at the matrimonial house and on 25.11.2008, she died in the Sardaben Hospital. Alleging the above, the FIR came to be lodged on 27.11.2008 by the mother of the deceased. 2.1 On the FIR being lodged and on setting the criminal law in motion, the charge-sheet came to be filed by the Investigating OfÏcer under the above provisions and thereafter, the case was transferred to the Sessions Court, as it was triable by the Learned Sessions Court. On charge being framed, the plea came to be recorded, wherein all the accused have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Therefore, to prove the case of the prosecution, 15 witnesses were examined and documentary evidence were placed on record. The learned Court, after considering the documentary evidence, has acquitted respondents – accused, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court. 3. Heard learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for the State. 4. Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for the State submits that the marriage span of the deceased was less than seven years, she stayed with her parents because of the harassment and torturing at the ends of the in-laws for two years and on being assured, she was sent back to the matrimonial house. It is stated that within one year thereafter, she committed suicide. Therefore, instead of drawing the presumption provided under Section 113A, the learned Court has acquitted the respondents by giving the benefit of the doubt. Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma submits that the learned Court has acquitted on the ground that during the treatment, which was provided by the in-laws, no adverse statements were given by the parents. Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma submits that it would be the natural conduct of parents that at that point of time, efforts would be to save her life and to settle the same at the matrimonial house. In that background, expectation from the learned Court with regard to the immediate statement would be unreasonable. Hence, the impugned order deserves to be interfered with. 4.1 Learned APP Mr. In that background, expectation from the learned Court with regard to the immediate statement would be unreasonable. Hence, the impugned order deserves to be interfered with. 4.1 Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma submits that from the evidence of the relatives of the deceased, the prosecution has established his case beyond a reasonable doubt with regard to the cruelty and harassment. However, the learned Court has held that there is no proximate link between the incident and the harassment which were alleged. Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma submits that the learned Court has given much weightage to the days of delay for the registration of the FIR, as on the death of the deceased on 25.11.2008, the FIR came to be lodged on 27.11.2008. Learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma submits that the delay would not be fatal in every case, as it would be natural conduct that in the sorrow of the death of the deceased, the parents might not come forward immediately for lodging the FIR. However, instead of taking a practical approach, the learned Court has acquitted the respondents of the charges and therefore, the impugned order deserves to be interfered with and the respondents are required to be convicted of the charges levelled against them. 5. Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned APP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma as well as on referring to the record and proceedings, it emerges that the marriage span of the deceased was of six years. Out of the six years, she stayed with the parents for two years because of the harassment alleged and torture made by the in-laws. It is the case of the prosecution that the reason for harassment was of less dowry at the time of the baby shower ceremony, which had happened three years before the date of the incident. When she was sent back and stayed for one year, no specific incident has been established by the prosecution to suggest that the harassment was made and it was continued for till her death. 5.1 It is true that the presumption under Section 113 has to be drawn in the event when a married lady commits suicide within seven years of her marriage span. However, in the opinion of this Court, it would be applicable only after establishing the guilt of cruelty provided under Section 498A of the IPC. 5.1 It is true that the presumption under Section 113 has to be drawn in the event when a married lady commits suicide within seven years of her marriage span. However, in the opinion of this Court, it would be applicable only after establishing the guilt of cruelty provided under Section 498A of the IPC. Therefore, the first requisite for attracting the presumption under Section 113(a) of the EVIDENCE ACT is that it must be proved that the wife was subjected to cruelty as defined under Section 498A of the IPC. Therefore, the mere fact that woman committed suicide within seven years of her marriage, the presumption under Section 113(a) of the EVIDENCE ACT would not be automatically applied. 5.2 So far as the evidence which was led by the prosecution to establish the cruelty, which is in the nature of the oral witnesses, who are the brother, mother and the brother-in-law, is concerned, the defence has established during the cross- examination that in the community of the deceased, dowry is prohibited at the time of marriage and even at the time of other functions also and that there is no compulsion on the parents to provide certain dowries. In addition to that, it also comes from the record that the deceased was initially taken to the Umiya Hospital at Kalol, thereafter she was referred to Sanjeevani Hospital at Nava Vadaj and lastly she was taken to the Shardaben Hospital. All the witnesses have admitted during cross- examination that the expenses were made by in-laws for the treatment. 5.3 Overall consideration of the evidence led by the prosecution suggests that there was no positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide. There should be a direct act or an active act which led the deceased to commit suicide and no other option and that act may be intended to push the deceased to commit such a final act. It emerges from the evidence that there was no live link or any proximate between the act of the deceased and the accused. In the absence of a live link, one cannot say that the accused had instigated or intentionally aided the commission of the suicide. It emerges from the evidence that there was no live link or any proximate between the act of the deceased and the accused. In the absence of a live link, one cannot say that the accused had instigated or intentionally aided the commission of the suicide. The word instigate means, as per the various decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite, or encourage to do an act and a person is said to instigate another when he actively suggests or stimulates him to act by any means or language, direct or indirect. 5.4 This Court is of the view that the prosecution fails to establish the ingredients of instigation, as the instigation has to be with mens rea. In absence of any positive act or any specific allegations with regard to the incident, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order of acquittal with regard to guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court while exercising the power under Section 3 78 of Cr.P.C. This Court has referred the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Mallappa v. State of Karnataka , reported in (2024) 3 SCC 544 , wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held para No.42, which is as under; “42. Our criminal jurisprudence is essentially based on the promise that no innocent shall be condemned as guilty. All the safeguards and the jurisprudential values of criminal law, are intended to prevent any failure of justice. Our criminal jurisprudence is essentially based on the promise that no innocent shall be condemned as guilty. All the safeguards and the jurisprudential values of criminal law, are intended to prevent any failure of justice. The principles which come into play while deciding an appeal from acquittal could be summarised as: (i) Appreciation of evidence is the core element of a criminal trial and such appreciation must be comprehensive — inclusive of all evidence, oral or documentary; (ii) Partial or selective appreciation of evidence may result in a miscarriage of justice and is in itself a ground of challenge; (iii) If the court, after appreciation of evidence, finds that two views are possible, the one in favour of the accused shall ordinarily be followed; (iv) If the view of the trial court is a legally plausible view, mere possibility of a contrary view shall not justify the reversal of acquittal; (v) If the appellate court is inclined to reverse the acquittal in appeal on a reappreciation of evidence, it must specifically address all the reasons given by the trial court for acquittal and must cover all the facts; (vi) In a case of reversal from acquittal to conviction, the appellate court must demonstrate an illegality, perversity or error of law or fact in the decision of the trial court. 5.5 Considering the overall circumstances, this Court does not find any perversity in the judgment of the acquittal passed by the learned Court below. Hence, the present appeal does not deserve to be entertained further. 6. Resultantly, the present appeal is dismissed.