Gujarat High Court
Parulben W/O Mahendrabhai Rameshbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 20 January, 2026
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 700 of
2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
=========================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=========================================
PARULBEN W/O MAHENDRABHAI RAMESHBHAI GODANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=========================================
Appearance:
MR ABHIRAJ R TRIVEDI(5576) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR J K SHAH, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 20/01/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI)
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No. 150/2016, whereby the appellant - accused Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 394, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and sentenced accordingly, the appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Page 1 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined
2. The present case originates from Sessions Case No. 150/2016, heard before the learned District and Sessions Judge at Surat. The sole accused, Parulben, wife of Mahendrabhai Rameshbbhai Godani and resident of Flat No. C/504, Meghmalhar Apartment, Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat, faced trial for offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 394, 201, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. The proceedings stemmed from a chargesheet filed in Criminal Case No. 28151/2016 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Second Court, Surat, following investigation into Sarthana Police Station I- C.R. No. 18/2016, and the case was duly committed to the Sessions Court as the offences were exclusively triable by it.
3. The prosecution's case, in detail, alleges that on 30/01/2016, prior to 19:00 hours, at the matrimonial home located at Flat No. C/504, Meghmalhar Residency, Sarthana, Surat, the accused Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani, who was the sister-in-law of the deceased Reshma Devendrabhai Godani, committed the offence out of deep enmity. The deceased Reshma, having married Devendra Rameshbbhai Godani on 09/02/2015 and residing in the same flat with her husband, his elder brother Mahendrabhai (husband of the accused), and the accused Parulben, had allegedly been repeatedly taunting and reproaching the deceased for having previously taken away her gold and silver jewellery. Harbouring a grudge due to these repeated taunts, the accused, on the day of the incident, waited for an opportune moment when the deceased had consumed her afternoon meal and was resting asleep on the bed. The accused then viciously assaulted the deceased by delivering multiple forceful blows to her head with a wooden stick (dhoka), inflicting grievous injuries that led to her murder. Not content with this, the accused, who had brought a bottle of acid earlier that morning, Page 2 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined proceeded to pour or splash the corrosive substance on the face and body of the deceased, causing further severe burns. Thereafter, the accused removed from the deceased's person the American diamond-studded gold earrings weighing approximately 2 grams and valued at Rs. 6,000/-, along with a gold nose ring weighing 0.1 gram and valued at Rs. 400/-, thereby committing robbery of jewellery totalling Rs. 6,400/-. The initial narrative provided to the family was that the deceased had consumed acid herself, but upon the arrival of the complainant's side, observations such as injury marks on the mouth, blackened face, burnt hands, and suspicious burn and scratch marks on the accused's own hands led to the belief that murder had been committed and evidence tampered with, prompting the lodging of the complaint involving elements of criminal conspiracy, false information, and violation of the police commissioner's notification.
4. Following the registration of the FIR at Sarthana Police Station as I-C.R. No. 18/2016 based on the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased, the investigating officer meticulously carried out the probe, which included recording statements of material witnesses, preparing necessary panchnamas of the scene of offence and physical condition of the body, collecting forensic and medical evidence, and apprehending the accused who was already in judicial custody. Upon concluding that sufficient prima facie evidence existed against the accused Parulben, the investigating officer submitted a chargesheet before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Second Court, Surat, whereupon the matter was registered as Criminal Case No. 28151/2016. In compliance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, copies of the chargesheet and accompanying documents were furnished to the accused. Recognising that the offences alleged were not within Page 3 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined its trial jurisdiction, the Magistrate's Court committed the case under Section 209 CrPC to the District and Sessions Court, Surat, where it was assigned Sessions Case No. 150/2016, and subsequently transferred to the appropriate Sessions Court for full trial and adjudication.
5. Upon the case being taken up for trial in the Sessions Court, on 30/06/2017, charges were framed against the accused Parulben under the aforementioned sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Gujarat Police Act, marked as Exh. 08. The charges were carefully read out and explained to the accused in the vernacular language to ensure comprehension, following which she was queried as to whether she admitted guilt or wished to stand trial. The accused categorically denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty, and expressed her intention to contest the case on merits, leading to the recording of her plea as Exh. 09. Consequently, the prosecution was called upon to lead evidence in support of the charges, and the trial commenced with the examination of oral witnesses and exhibition of documentary evidence. Upon closure of the prosecution's evidence, the accused's further statement under Section 313 CrPC would have been recorded, affording her an opportunity to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against her, during which she would have maintained her innocence and denied all adverse material.
6. To substantiate the grave charges levelled against the accused and to bring her guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the prosecution has adduced comprehensive oral testimony from key witnesses, including the complainant (father of the deceased), family members present at the time of discovery, investigating officers, medical experts, and other corroborative witnesses, Page 4 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined alongside a substantial array of documentary evidence such as the post-mortem report, forensic reports, panchnamas, seizure memos, and medical papers, all aimed at establishing the chain of circumstances pointing unequivocally to the culpability of the accused in the commission of the offences.
7. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses and exhibited 38 documents.
:Oral Evidences:
Sr. No. Name of Witness Page No. 1 P.W.No.1, Dr. Sandip Kalidas Raval 13 2 P.W.No.2, Nileshbhai Vinubhai Randholiya 19 3 P.W.No.3, Bharatbhai Chaturbhai Nathani 29 4 P.W.No.4, Hiteshbhai Mavjibhai Nakarani 33 5 P.W.No.5, Atulbhai Labhshankar Oza 35 6 P.W. No.6, Atulbhai Vinubhai Randholiya 37 7 P.W. No.7, Piyushbhai Vinodbhai Vadodariya 40 8 P.W. No.8, Khodidasbhai Arvindbhai Vora 44 9 P.W.No.9, Dr. Anand Chotubhai Patel 46 10 P.W.No.10, Dr. Nishben Vinodbhai Chandra 56 11 P.W.No.11, Chandubhai Jerambhai Nathani 60 12 P.W.No.12, Manjulaben Chandubhai Nathani 62 13 P.W.No.13, Kanchanben Ramjibhai Jiyani 64 14 P.W.No.14, Krishnaben Pratikbhai Kathrodiya 65 15 P.W.No.15, Dilipbhai Karsanbhai Savaliya 66 16 P.W.No.16, Vikasbhai Dineshbhai Vaghela 70 17 P.W.No.17, Kanubhai Mahadevbhai Chaudhary 73 18 P.W.No.18, Ganpatbhai Bhadarsingh Barad 85 19 P.W.No.19, Vinodchandra Aatmarambhai Patel 87 20 P.W.No.20, Atulkumar Kantilal patel 93 Page 5 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined :Documentary Evidences: Ex. Name of Exhibit Page No. No. 1 Inquest Panchnama 10 2 Police Yadi for P.M. Note 14 3 P.M. Note 15 4 Panchnama of crime scene 20 5 Panch Slip 21 to 27 6 Panch Slip 30 7 Discovery Panchnama Dt. 02/02/2016 31 8 Discovery Panchnama Dt. 03/02/2016 34 9 Panch Slip 36 10 Accused's Arrest Panchnama 38 11 CCTV footage from DVD Panchnama 41 12 Accused Parulben's Medical Examination Police List 47 13 Accused Parulben's Medical Certificate 49
Police List of medical examination of suspected 14 50 accused Devendrabhai and Mahendrabhai 15 Devendrabhai MLC Case paper 51 16 Devendrabhai's medical cerificate 52 17 Mahendrabhai MLC Case paper 53 18 Mahendrabhai's medical cerificate 54 Police list regarding medical treatment of accused 19 57 parulben Medical Certificate of accused Parulben from Civil 20 58 hospital 21 Complainant's Compliant 62 22 Map 71 23 Letter to draw the map 72 24 Report of the Local F.S.L. visit of crime scene 74 25 Report of Fingerprint expert of crime scene 75 26 Letter to provide opinion of Muddamal analysis 76 27 Receipt note of sending the Muddamal to F.S.L 77 28 Receipt of the received Muddamal to F.S.L 78 29 F.S.L's biological report with forwarding letter 79 Page 6 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined Ex.
Name of Exhibit Page No.
No.
30 F.S.L's serological report. 80
31 Analysis report form the chemical department to FSL 81
Copy of the disarmament notification issued by the 32 82 Police Commissioner's 33 Letter and index regarding registration of crime. 83 34 Station Diary extract 86 35 D.V.D 88 Letter of the consideration of witnesses with the main 36 94 charge-sheet 37 List of original case papers from the investigation. 95 38 State report of the C.R.I. No. 2452/16 96
8. Appreciation of Key Oral Evidence: The prosecution examined several material witnesses whose depositions form the foundational oral evidence in this circumstantial case. The relevant testimonies of the complainant (father of the deceased), neighbouring witnesses, and the Investigating Officer are summarized below:
8.1 PW-11: Chandubhai Jerambhai Nathani Father of the deceased Reshma Devendrabhai Godani, deposed that on 30.01.2016 at about 19:00 hrs he received a telephone call from Mahendrabhai Ramesh bhai Godani informing him that Reshma had consumed acid. Reaching flat C/504, Meghmalhar Residency, he found accused Devendrabhai, Mahendrabhai, and Parulben present, all of whom stated Reshma had consumed acid. He observed the deceased lying near the bedroom door in moribund condition wearing coffee-coloured kurta and red pyjama, with blunt injury marks on head and forehead, blackened face, burnt skin on face and both hands from acid, and burn marks plus nail scratches on Parulben's hands. These led him to suspect murder rather than Page 7 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined suicide. He directed his brother-in-law to inform police, resulting in registration of FIR, which he identified. He further stated his wife later disclosed an alleged illicit relationship between Devendrabhai and Parulben, causing marital discord and harassment after Reshma discovered it. In cross-examination, he remained at the scene till about 03:00 hrs, confirmed Parulben's hand injuries burns and scratches but did not notice jewellery details, stated affair information came from his wife only post-cremation, denied Parulben's burns were from hot water poured by deceased, admitted limited post-marriage visits and no knowledge of interlock door-key system, noted door was open on arrival with no outsiders inside, and maintained suspicion against Devendrabhai, Mahendrabhai, and particularly Parulben, reiterating injuries suggested murder possibly involving more than one person as per FIR.
8.2. PW-13 Kanchanben resident of flat C/501 directly opposite the crime scene, deposed that she saw deceased Reshma and accused Parulben together in flat C/504 around 14:30 hrs on the day of incident after returning from Daman. She had no direct knowledge of the offence. She learned of the incident only when Parulben shouted to neighbour Induben who is resident of flat C/503 that Reshma had consumed acid, leading to initial belief of suicide. She went to the flat only after the shout but could not see inside due to heavy smoke and returned without viewing the body.
In cross-examination, she confirmed accompanying Devendrabhai (deceased's husband) to court that day, being questioned by police the next day, and not entering the flat earlier due to smoke.
8.3. PW-14 Krishnaben resident of flat C/502, deposed that after Page 8 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined 18:00 hrs on 30.01.2016 she heard accused Parulben repeatedly shouting "Acid splashed, acid splashed", causing neighbours to gather. At the flat entrance she observed smoke, strong acid smell, spilled blood, and deceased Reshma lying in died condition on the bedroom threshold with acid splashed on her face. She saw no actual act or further interior details. Initially appeared as acid attack; later general talk indicated murder by Parulben. She confirmed only three females present: Reshma, Parulben, and Parulben's daughter. She identified Parulben in court and stated her police statement was recorded. In cross-examination, she clarified Devendrabhai accompanied her to court that day, "acid splashed" phrase arose from passage gossip among gathered persons (not recorded in her police statement), and body position was specifically bedroom threshold, not main entrance.
8.4. PW-17 Kanubhai the Investigating Officer who acted as PSO on 30.01.2016, deposed that he recorded FIR from complainant Chandubhai alleging murder, conducted spot and inquest panchnamas, recorded neighbour statements, sent body for post- mortem, arrested accused Parulben after her discovery of clothes worn during offence and hidden earrings of deceased, seized articles including blood and hair samples, acid bottle, blood-stained clothes, and wooden dhoko from scene, forwarded them to FSL, included local FSL spot visit report, fingerprint report, and biological, serological, chemical analysis reports, and filed charge- sheet only against Parulben.
8.5. In cross-examination, he confirmed only hand injuries noted in arrest panchnama, initial suspicion on Mahendrabhai and Devendrabhai but no charge-sheet against them as evidence Page 9 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined pointed only to Parulben, chance prints on dhoko did not match accused's fingerprints, blood and acid-stained shirt and pants found, limited inquiry into alleged affair and door lock system, CCTV footage seized later on 17.02.2016, and denied fabrication of panchnamas or false case, maintaining the accused committed the offence. The above oral evidence, particularly the observations of PW-11 injuries inconsistent with suicide, suspicion on multiple persons and neighbours, forms the core direct testimony.
9. The prosecution's case, as supported by the written arguments at Exhibit-102 and the evidence on record, is that the deceased Reshmaben Devendrabhai Godani and the accused Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani were real sisters-in-law (dearani- jethani). The accused had an illicit relationship with the deceased's husband Devendra, which came to the deceased's knowledge, and had previously taken away the deceased's jewellery, leading to repeated taunts and rebukes by the deceased and thereby creating deep enmity. On the day of the incident, actuated by this enmity, the accused assaulted the deceased on the head with a wooden pestle (dhoka), inflicting grievous injuries including fracture of nasal bone, other fractures, and broken teeth, which collectively caused her death. With the premeditated intention of destroying evidence and staging a suicide, the accused poured acid on the deceased's face to disfigure it and falsely projected the death as self-inflicted by consumption of acid. Prior to the incident, the accused was captured on CCTV footage produced and viewed during trial going downstairs via lift to procure the acid bottle and returning to the flat, demonstrating clear premeditation and preparation. At the time of the offence, only the accused, the deceased, and the accused's minor daughter aged about 6 years were present in the flat. The husbands of both were elsewhere and Page 10 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined bore no incriminating injuries. Immediately after the act, the accused herself shouted and called neighbours whereupon neighbouring witness Kanchanben arrived and found the deceased lying dead in a pool of blood with acid fumes in the house; no other living adult was present. The accused sustained burn injuries on her hand caused by a corrosive liquid like consistent with acid, as opined by the Medical Officer and scratch nail mark injuries on both sides of her chest injuries she falsely attributed to hot water without satisfactory explanation. Human blood was detected in her hair and nail samples as per F.S.L. biological and serological reports, which she failed to explain. She gave false information to the deceased's parents that the death was due to acid consumption, and blood stained clothes were recovered from the flat, indicating attempts to destroy evidence by washing them and cleaning the scene.
9.1. The prosecution asserts that this forms an unbroken chain of circumstances motive from the illicit affair and jewellery dispute, exclusive presence and opportunity, prior procurement of acid, unexplained injuries on the accused inconsistent with her version, recovery of the weapon and acid bottle, false explanations, human blood in her samples, CCTV footage of preparation, immediate post-incident conduct, and absence of any other person at the scene pointing unerringly and exclusively to the guilt of the accused and to no one else.
9.2. Even if the defence contention regarding imperfect proof of jewellery recovery or motive is accepted in arguing, motive is not essential in a circumstantial evidence case, and where the chain conclusively establishes guilt, the accused cannot escape Page 11 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined conviction for murder merely because motive is not proved to the hilt. The CCTV footage is admissible as electronic evidence of pre- incident preparatory conduct, having been viewed during trial, copy supplied to defence, and the concerned employee examined as a witness; its authenticity and non-tamperable nature make it a relevant link in the chain. In substance, the accused, driven by enmity arising from an illicit relationship and jewellery dispute, with premeditation and in furtherance of a criminal design, murdered the deceased by inflicting fatal head injuries with a wooden pestle and thereafter poured acid on her face to destroy evidence and stage a suicide, all of which stands established by a complete and unbroken chain of incriminating circumstances pointing solely to her guilt.
10. The defence's case supported by the evidence and cross- examination on record, is that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani beyond reasonable doubt, and that several serious doubts and infirmities render the case unreliable, warranting acquittal. The residential flat had a main entrance door with an interlocking latch and four keys, one each with the four family members (the accused, her husband Mahendrabhai, the deceased Reshmaben, and the deceased's husband Devendrabhai), allowing any of them to enter or exit independently at any time without restriction. In the original complaint, the complainant named not only the accused but also Mahendrabhai and Devendrabhai as suspects in the murder conspiracy. However, during investigation their names were dropped without adequate explanation, raising questions about selective prosecution. The Medical Officer who conducted the post- mortem accepted in cross-examination the defence suggestion that the deceased's death could have been caused by more than one person, and that restraint would explain her inability to resist Page 12 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined making it possible that Mahendrabhai and Devendrabhai acted together to inflict injuries and pour acid on her. It was Mahendrabhai (the accused's husband) who first telephoned the complainant and informed him that the deceased had consumed acid a fact inconsistent with the prosecution's claim that the accused alone sprinkled acid to stage suicide. The accused was medically examined twice before and after arrest, and initially both husbands were also treated as suspects and medically examined, yet no incriminating injuries linking them to a scuffle were found; this cannot lead to the conclusion that only the accused was involved. The wooden pestle was already lying at the scene when the panchnama was prepared and chance prints were lifted by the F.S.L. officer; yet the panchnama was drawn up as if the accused later discovered and produced it, rendering the so called discovery unreliable and incapable of being used as an incriminating circumstance. Similarly, the alleged recovery of the deceased's jewellery on being pointed out by the accused has not been properly proved, and the possibility that the pestle was planted cannot be ruled out.
10.1. The evidence of Medical Officers cannot be accepted as invariably true, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mayur Panabhai Shah vs. State of Gujarat (1982 Cri.L.J. 1972) , where it was observed that a doctor's statement is not always presumed to be correct.
10.2. The chest scratch injuries allegedly noticed by Dr. Anand Chhotubhai Patel on 31/01/2016 were not corroborated by Dr. Nishaben Vinodbhai Chandrani's subsequent examination and certificate (Exhibits-56 & 57), rendering this piece of evidence Page 13 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined doubtful and unreliable for linking the accused to the crime.
10.3. The CCTV footage has not been properly proved: it was not produced in original form, the statement of the person who handled it was recorded 17 days later while the witness claims it was viewed and copied on the same day, raising a strong possibility of subsequent fabrication or tampering.
10.4. Moreover, the original complaint appears to have been suppressed, rendering the entire investigation tainted; no reliance can be placed on such a flawed probe. The charge-sheet was filed only against the accused, with no case made out against any other persons. Yet Section 120(B) IPC was invoked, which by definition requires at least two persons; this internal contradiction in the prosecution's own case makes it dangerous to hold that the accused alone committed the murder. Recovery of jewellery and the weapon has not been proved satisfactorily, so the charge under Section 394 IPC cannot stand. The incident occurred inside a private residential flat, not a public place, and therefore no offence under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act is made out.
10.5. In view of these infirmities multiple access to the flat, dropping of other named suspects, possibility of involvement of more than one person, unreliable medical evidence on injuries, doubtful recoveries presented as discoveries, unproved and potentially fabricated CCTV footage, tainted investigation, and failure to prove exclusive involvement no clear and unbroken chain of circumstances exists pointing solely to the accused. The prosecution has not succeeded in proving the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused is entitled to the benefit of Page 14 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined doubt. In substance, the defence submits that the evidence is replete with serious doubts, inconsistencies and procedural lapses; the possibility of involvement of others particularly the Devendrabhai (deceased's husband) and Mahendrabhai (accused's husband) initially suspected cannot be ruled out; the investigation is tainted; and the circumstantial chain is far from complete or conclusive. The accused must therefore be acquitted by holding her not guilty and setting her at liberty.
11. It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the appellant that the appeal against conviction deserves to be allowed and the appellant Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani is entitled to be acquitted by extending the benefit of doubt to her. The impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No. 150/2016 suffers from lapses in appreciation evidence, overlooking of material infirmities and contradictions appearing on record, and impermissible drawing of adverse inferences against the accused and has failed to consider the material aspects in a case which rests entirely upon circumstantial evidence.
11.1. It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence, as repeatedly laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of decisions including Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1984 SC 1622), that in cases based wholly on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete, cogent, consistent and incapable of explanation with any hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused. The chain must be so far complete as to exclude every reasonable hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused. If two views are Page 15 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined reasonably possible on the evidence on record one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to her innocence then the view which is favourable to the accused must be accepted and she must be given the benefit of doubt. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, several serious and reasonable doubts persist which make it impossible for this Court to hold that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
12. In support of his submissions, learned advocate for the appellants - accused has relied upon the decision in case of Laxman Prasad Alias Laxman vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [(2023) 6 SCC 399] and Munikrishna alias Krishna etc. vs. State by Ulsoor PS [2022 SCC OnLine SC 1449] and has submitted that as per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court if one link in chain of circumstances to be missing and not proved, the conviction based on circumstantial evidence is required to be set aside.
13. The prosecution has heavily relied upon the alleged motive of deep rooted enmity arising from an illicit relationship between the accused Parulben and the deceased's husband Devendrabhai, coupled with previous disputes over gold and silver jewellery. However, no satisfactory material whatsoever has been produced on record to substantiate the existence of any such illicit relationship. The entire motive of illicit relationship therefore remains in the realm of mere allegation and suspicion. Similarly, the allegation of previously taking away of jewellery by the accused has not been proved by any documentary evidence such as receipts, photographs of jewellery, previous police complaint or any independent witness. In absence of proof of motive, though motive Page 16 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined is not sine qua non for conviction in a murder case, its absence certainly becomes a relevant factor which weakens the prosecution case when the entire evidence is circumstantial in nature and when the prosecution has sought to build the chain of circumstances upon the foundation of such unproved motive. The Sessions Court has erred in treating this unproved motive as a proved circumstance in the chain.
14. The testimony of neighbouring witnesses PW-13 Kanchanben and PW-14 Krishnaben, though independent and reliable to the extent that they reached the spot immediately after hearing the alarm raised by the accused herself, only establishes that at the time of their arrival, only the accused Parulben along with her minor daughter aged about 6 years was present in the flat and the deceased was lying dead in a pool of blood with acid fumes in the air. This circumstance by no stretch of imagination conclusively proves that the accused was the author of the crime or that no other person could have been involved in the commission of offence prior to the arrival of these neighbours. The flat is situated in a multi-storey apartment building; the main entrance door had an interlocking latch system and four separate keys were available with four adult family members the accused, her husband Mahendrabhai, the deceased Reshmaben and her husband Devendrabhai. Any of them could have entered or exited the flat independently at any time. The possibility that some other person committed the act and left the flat before the accused raised the alarm cannot be ruled out merely on the basis of the presence of the accused at the time of arrival of neighbours. The Sessions Court has not considered the aspect in treating this circumstance as proof of exclusive opportunity and sole authorship by the accused.
Page 17 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined
15. One of the most crucial aspects of the defence which has been completely overlooked by the Sessions Court is the specific explanation offered by the accused herself. In her detailed statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as in her defence evidence, the accused has categorically stated that she was trying to save the deceased Reshmaben at the time of incident and in the process of handling or removing the acid bottle or trying to help the deceased, she herself received burn injury on her hand due to accidental contact with the corrosive substance. This explanation is not only plausible but also consistent with the nature of the injury sustained by her. The medical evidence shows that the burn was on the hand and was caused by a corrosive substance like acid. It is quite possible in the heat of the moment that while attempting to rescue or assist the deceased who had already been attacked, the accused came in contact with the acid. The prosecution has not led any positive evidence to disprove this version or to show that the injury was sustained during the commission of the offence itself. In such circumstances, when a plausible and reasonable explanation is forthcoming from the accused which is not inherently improbable, it is not safe to discard the same merely for want of corroboration. The benefit of doubt arising from this plausible explanation ought to have been given to the accused.
16. The forensic evidence of detection of human blood in the hair and nail clippings of the accused is undoubtedly a serious incriminating circumstance. However, the prosecution has not conducted any DNA profiling to conclusively establish that the blood belongs to the deceased. In absence of such scientific corroboration, the possibility of secondary or transfer Page 18 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined contamination during the course of the accused trying to save the deceased, lifting her body, or handling her in an attempt to render help cannot be ruled out. The chain of custody of the samples, though not seriously challenged, still leaves some scope for doubt when considered along with the overall facts of the case. The Sessions Court has erred in treating this circumstance as conclusive proof of active participation in the crime without considering the reasonable alternative hypothesis put forward by the defence.
17. The CCTV footage, which is heavily relied upon by the prosecution to establish premeditation and prior procurement of acid, suffers from serious evidentiary infirmities rendering it unsafe for reliance. There is no certificate as mandated under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, in the prescribed form, has been produced. The statement of the concerned apartment employee was recorded after an unexplained delay of about seventeen days. There is no contemporaneous panchnama evidencing seizure of the original hard disk or the CCTV recording system under proper safeguards. In the absence of these foundational requirements, the possibility of subsequent editing, selective clipping, or even fabrication cannot be completely ruled out. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap Vs. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 116), has categorically held that electronic evidence such as CCTV footage, in the absence of strict compliance with Section 65B(4) and without proof of integrity of the source device, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible evidence. In the same vein, the High Court of Gujarat in Dhruben Guraldas Balani Vs. State of Gujarat has unequivocally held that "Electronic records - admissibility of - content of electronic records can not be proved by oral evidence - it becomes mandatory that before referring D.V.D., C.D or photographs, which may be digitally taken, cerftificate u/S. 65B(4) of Page 19 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined Evidence Act would be a pre-requisite for Court to consider them as admissible information contained in electronic record. " The Sessions Court has not considered the aspect in treating the said CCTV footage as trustworthy electronic evidence to establish premeditation.
18. The recoveries of blood stained clothes from the almirah and the wooden pestle (dhoka) also remain doubtful. The almirah from which the clothes were allegedly recovered was admittedly not locked. The flat had already been opened by the police before the so called discovery. The wooden pestle was already lying at the scene of offence when the FSL team visited and prepared the panchnama; yet it was later shown as a discovery at the instance of the accused. These circumstances raise serious question marks about the voluntariness and genuineness of the recoveries and the possibility of improvement or planting cannot be wholly ruled out.
19. The initial complaint lodged by the father of the deceased specifically named not only the accused but also her husband Mahendrabhai and the deceased's husband Devendrabhai as suspected persons in the conspiracy to commit the murder. However, during investigation their names were quietly dropped without any detailed explanation or justification appearing on record. The medical evidence recorded during trial also accepted the possibility that the injuries could have been caused by more than one person. These factors, taken cumulatively, create a serious doubt about the fairness and completeness of the investigation and about the theory of sole involvement of the accused. Though the post-mortem report conclusively establishes that the death was homicidal and was caused by repeated blows with a blunt object resulting in grievous injuries including fracture Page 20 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined of nasal bone, multiple fractures and broken teeth, the most vital link that is, the positive proof that it was the accused and the accused alone who inflicted those injuries remains conspicuously missing and unproved beyond reasonable doubt when viewed in the light of all the aforesaid infirmities and doubts.
20. Furthermore, the prosecution's reliance on the alleged false information provided by the accused to the deceased's family that the death resulted from self consumption of acid fails to hold up under scrutiny. While the accused did initially convey this narrative, the evidence suggests it could have been a panicked or mistaken assumption in the chaotic aftermath of discovering the body, rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead. The Sessions Court overlooked the fact that Mahendrabhai the accused's husband, was the first to inform the complainant via telephone about the acid consumption, as admitted in the testimony. This shifts the origin of the misinformation away from the accused exclusively and raises questions about why the prosecution did not probe deeper into the roles of other family members. In circumstantial evidence cases, where every link must be ironclad, such ambiguities erode the chain's integrity and support a hypothesis of innocence, as the accused's statements could align with a genuine belief in suicide before the full extent of injuries was apparent.
21. Another infirmity lies in the handling of the acid bottle and its procurement. The prosecution claims the accused fetched the acid earlier that morning, but the evidence chain is broken by the lack of direct linkage to the bottle used in the incident. No fingerprints or forensic traces tying the accused definitively to the bottle were presented, and the CCTV footage already deemed unreliable due to Page 21 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined non-compliance with evidentiary standards does not show the contents of what was carried. The defence's suggestion that the acid could have been present in the household for legitimate purposes, such as cleaning, or brought by another person, remains unrefuted. Here, the acid's presence and use could reasonably point to involvement by others, particularly given the multi key access to the flat, thereby warranting the benefit of doubt for the accused.
22. The invocation of Section 120(B) IPC for criminal conspiracy, despite charging only the accused, exposes a fundamental flaw in the prosecution's framework. Conspiracy, by its nature, requires agreement between two or more persons, yet the chargesheet and trial proceeded against a solitary accused without identifying co- conspirators. This anomaly, unaddressed by the Sessions Court, renders the charge untenable and suggests a prosecutorial overreach to bolster weaker elements of the case.
22.1. The entire case's credibility is undermined, as it implies the investigation selectively targeted the accused while exonerating others named in the FIR without transparent reasoning, creating a reasonable doubt that precludes conviction.
22.2. Moreover, the post-mortem and medical evidence, while establishing homicidal death, do not point the time of death with precision sufficient to exclude the possibility of the offence occurring when the accused was not the only one present. The approximate time of death, based on rigor mortis and other indicators, allows for a window during which Devendrabhai or Mahendrabhai could have been in the flat, as their alibis were not rigorously verified with independent corroboration like mobile Page 22 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined location data or witness accounts. The Medical Officer's concession in cross-examination that the injuries could result from multiple assailants further supports the defence's theory of joint involvement by the Devendrabhai and Mahendrabhai, possibly motivated by familial disputes or financial issues unexamined by the prosecution.
23. In view of the details discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, in consonance with the material placed for consideration as relied upon by the prosecution and confronted by the defence, and having regard to the conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge, it is undisputed that, as elaborately discussed hereinabove, the entire case of the prosecution rests solely on circumstantial evidence. In such circumstances and while appreciating the evidence on record. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shail Kumari v. State of Chhattisgarh , reported in 2025 (0) AIJEL- SC 75681, while considering the judgment in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 116 has held that prosecution must stand and fall on its own legs and in case of circumstantial evidence, the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistence with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
24. In a case of circumstantial evidence, the chain is required to be completed as mandated under the law so as to indicate the guilt of the accused while discarding any other theory of the crime. If Page 23 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined one of the link goes missing and not proved, in view of the settled law on the point, the conviction is required to be interfered with. At this stage, with profit, we may refer to the decision in case of Laxman Prasad Alias Laxman (supra) where the Hon'ble Apex Court after referring to Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra [(1984) 4 SCC 116] and Shailendra Rajdev Pasvan vs. State of Gujarat [(2020) 14 SCC 750] has quashed the conviction by making observations in paragraph 2 to 4 as under:
"2. The present one is a case of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution led evidence to establish three links of the chain: (i) motive, (ii) last seen, and (iii) recovery of weapon of assault, at the pointing out of the appellant. The High Court, while dealing with the evidence on record, agreed with the finding of motive and the last seen, however, insofar as the recovery of the weapon of assault and bloodstained clothes were concerned, the High Court in para 18 of the judgment held the same to be invalid and also goes to the extent to say that the recovery which has been made does not indicate that the appellant has committed the offence. Still, it observed that looking to the entire gamut and other clinching evidence against the appellant of last seen and motive, affirmed the conviction.
3. We do not find such conclusion of the High Court to be strictly in accordance with law. In a case of circumstantial evidence, the chain has to be complete in all respects so as to indicate the guilt of the accused and also exclude any other theory of the crime. The law is well settled on the above point. Reference may be had to the following cases:
(1) Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra,
(ii) Shailendra Rajdev Pasvan v. State of Gujarat.
4. Thus, if the High Court found one of the links to be missing and not proved in view of the settled law on the point, the conviction ought to have been interfered with."
25. In view of the settled law that one must look for a complete chain of circumstances and not on snapped and scattered links which do not make a complete sequence. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is drawn should be fully proved, and such circumstances must be conclusive in nature. Moreover, all the circumstances should be complete, and there should be no gap left Page 24 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined in the chain of evidence; in the present case, the chain is not completed.
26. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and upon an overall appreciation of the evidence on record, it clearly emerges that the prosecution has failed to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances so as to point unerringly towards the guilt of the accused alone. On the contrary, several reasonable hypotheses consistent with the innocence of the accused arise from the material on record, which have not been satisfactorily excluded by the prosecution. The possibility of involvement of other family members or occupants, who admittedly had free and unhindered access to the flat at the relevant time, has not been ruled out by leading cogent or reliable evidence. The reliance placed upon the injuries found on the accused and the alleged bloodstains is wholly misplaced, inasmuch as the defence has offered a plausible and consistent explanation that the same were sustained while attempting to assist and rescue the victim. The said explanation cannot be said to be improbable or false, and in the absence of any convincing rebuttal by the prosecution, the learned Sessions Court was not justified in treating the said circumstance as incriminating. Likewise, the prosecution evidence in the form of CCTV footage, recoveries, and forensic material suffers from serious infirmities. The evidentiary value of such material is considerably diluted on account of gaps in the chain of custody, lack of independent corroboration, and inconsistencies in the oral evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The CCTV footage, in particular, does not conclusively establish the presence of the accused at the scene of offence at the relevant time nor does it exclude the presence of other persons. It is a settled position of law that where a case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances relied upon Page 25 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/700/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2026 undefined must be fully established and must form a chain so complete as to exclude every hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused. The learned Sessions Court has not considered the aspect to apply this well established principle, as reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (supra), and has proceeded to record the conviction on conjectures and surmises. In the considered opinion of this Hon'ble Court, such an approach has resulted in serious prejudice to the accused and has caused substantial prejudice affecting the fairness of the trial. The impugned judgment and order of conviction, therefore, cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed and set aside.
27. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the impugned judgment is set aside, and the appellant Parulben Mahendrabhai Godani is acquitted of all charges. She shall be released forthwith unless wanted in any other case. Bail bonds, if any, stand discharged.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) (R. T. VACHHANI, J) Kaushal Rathod/MVP Page 26 of 26 Uploaded by MR.MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 00:12:35 IST 2026