Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Natvarbhai @ Balyo Ramanbhai Dantani ... on 25 February, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1659 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
NATVARBHAI @ BALYO RAMANBHAI DANTANI (VAGHRI) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ROHAN H.RAVAL APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR P B KHANDHERIA(5228) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 25/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal filed under Sections 378(1)((3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 14.03.2008 passed by the learned Fast Track Court, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.195 of 2007. The offence was registered under Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). The FIR was registered at Vejalpur Police Station and after the investigation, the charge- sheet was filed.
2. The incident had occurred on 09.11.2006 at about 1.00 in the afternoon, where the victim deceased - Sunitaben Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined committed suicide by hanging herself with the 'Duptta', tied on her neck attached to the pipe of the ceiling of the matrimonial house. The allegation is that the cause of suicide is the mental and physical cruelty meted at the hands of the accused, who are husband, younger brother-in-law and mother-in-law. The father of the deceased Bhanubhai Bhulabhai Chunara gave the complaint on 11.11.2006 at about 19:55 in the evening.
3. Learned APP Mr. Rohan H.Raval has submitted that the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judge is contrary to the law and evidence on record. The prosecution has established the case beyond reasonable doubt. The learned Judge was required to appreciate the evidence of Prosecution Witness No.4, the complainant - Bhanubahi Bhulabhai Chunara, who has been examined at Exh.20, who had very categorically deposed in his testimony that prior to two years of the incident, Sunita got married with accused No.1. He had stated that Sunita used to tell him that her husband was doubting her character and thereby beating her, so also demanding dowry.
4. Learned APP Mr. Raval has further stated that one year prior to her committing suicide, the daughter of the complainant had come back but due to the intervention of the community people, she had been sent back. He stated that on the date of the incident, he received a phone call from his son Alpeshbhai Bhanubhai Chunara that Sunita was not well. On reaching there he found that Sunita was lying on the cot, they took their daughter to V.S. Hospital, where she was declared Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined dead by the Doctor. Learned APP submitted that the complaint
- Exh.21 was proved. The witness was extensively cross- examined by the other side, but nothing adverse has come to be elicited.
5. Learned APP has further submitted that the Prosecution Witness No.5 - Manjuben Bhanubhai Chunara, the mother of the deceased, was examined at Exh.23, who has also stated the same fact that the husband of Sunita was doubting her character and was demanding dowry. Learned APP submitted that the mother has also confirmed the fact of intervention by the community people for sending her back. She also clarified the fact that she was subjected to cruelty.
6. Learned APP has stated that the Prosecution Witness No.6 - Alpeshbhai Bhanubhai Chunara, the brother of the deceased examined at Exh.24, has stated about the fact that the deceased used to tell him that her husband was doubting her character and beating her and also demanding dowry. Learned APP has submitted that the postmortem report of the Doctor Tapan G.Mehta (P.W.3), who has been examined at Exh.18 and his statement, categorically shows that there was external injury and the cause of death is stated to be suffocation. Learned APP stated that ligature marks were found on the neck of the deceased. The Doctor has confirmed that, if someone tries to commit suicide by hanging herself with 'Dupatta', the said mark could be found.
7. Learned APP further submitted that the injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. However, the evidence on record of the P.S.I. - Shivlal Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined Ravandas Raval (P.W.9), I.O. - Rameshchandra Madhavlal Patel (P.W.10) and the P.S.O. - Kiransinh Chandubha Jadeja (P.W.8), clearly corroborates the evidence of other witnesses. The learned Judge has erred in acquitting them. He submitted that the learned Judge was required to draw bring presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 since the matrimonial life was only of two years.
8. Heard learned APP appearing for the State and perused the judgment and the evidence on record.
9. The judgment of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415, would be relevant to be mentioned since the judgment lays down the general principles for the consideration of the acquittal appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held thus:
The following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record and one favourable to the accused has been taken by the trial court, it ought not to be disturbed by the appellate court.
10. The learned trial Court Judge has acquitted the accused. The evidence, thus has to be examined by giving the benefit of double presumption in favour of the accused. This Court has also examined the views of the learned trial Court to consider the evidence on record.
11. The learned trial Court Judge has threadbare examined all the witnesses and has undertaken the exercise of noting the ingredients of Section 498A of IPC read with Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act for examining the fact whether, the facts and circumstances, as stated, are sufficient enough to consider the case of harassment in the form of mental and physical cruelty to bring the case under the ingredient of Section 498A read with Section 113A of the Evidence Act. The learned Judge has noted the evidence of the parents and brother. The evidence, which was deposed by the witnesses was to the effect that the husband was doubting the fidelity of the deceased and after the intervention of the community Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined members and relatives and after persuading the deceased, they had sent her back.
12. The learned Judge has noted the fact that the incident of suicide had occurred on 09.11.2006 while, there has been considerable delay in giving the complaint on 11.11.2006. The learned Judge has also noted that the father had the occasion to see the police at V.S. Hospital in spite of that, he had not given any complaint alleging any cruelty or of any dowry demand. The learned Judge has also noted that the cause of delay has not been specifically mentioned, however, an attempt has been made to explain the delay stating that the cause for the suicide was not known and unless and until the cause is not known, they could not give their complaint.
13. The learned Judge has thus, noted that if at all, that reason is to be believed, then on 10.11.2006, when the P.M. was conducted, no complaint was given. The relatives of the deceased had taken the dead body for the final rites to Sanand and prior to that also, they have not given any complaint before the police. Even the parents, sister and brother, if they were knowing about the unbearable harassment since last two years, then no such complaint has been filed nor any definite proceeding has been initiated. The learned Judge, thus, has come to the conclusion that the delay of filing the complaint for almost about 48 hours has not been specifically explained and the allegations appears to have been made after considerable deliberation and thinking.
Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined
14. The learned Judge has further noted that the mother has referred to Ramanbhai and Rasikbhai, who stated to have taken part in the settlement. However, no such statements of the witnesses have been recorded. The learned Judge has also observed the fact that if at all, such statements were recorded by the I.O., then that could have become a part of the case diary though, no such statements are on record and the case diary could not be proved to consider the fact that any such statements of the witnesses, who are stated to have intervened for the settlement between the deceased and the accused, had been recorded. The said fact also does not get proved.
15. The learned Judge has also noted about the deposition of both the parents and the witness son - Manojkumar, where they have alleged that there was demand of Rs.15,000/-, however, the learned Judge has concluded that such demand of Rs.15,000/- was not in a way of dowry. The evidence of the witness was recorded, where the complainant has admitted in the cross-examination that Rs.15,000/- was given to husband Natwarbhai for his business. Thus, it has been rightly concluded that such amount even if considered to be given, the same would not fall in the definition of dowry, since Rs.15,000/-, which may be believed to be demanded, was for the need in the business. The another allegation of doubting the character of the deceased also does not get proved since with whom she was alleged to be having a relation, was not brought on record. Further, they have also stated that the deceased was rebuked, as she could not bear the child within Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined a period of two years, but such facts has not been stated in the deposition.
16. The learned Judge has also observed about the 'Wardi' as an Accidental Note No.50/06, produced at Exh.29, and when this note was registered, the father, mother, accused and other in-laws of the deceased were present there. The cause of the death has not been given at that time, while the cause which has been noted was that the deceased was under
stress, as she could not bear a child between two years of marriage and therefore, she had taken the last step.
17. The learned Judge has rightly appreciated the evidence on record. The evidence with regard to instigation for committing suicide could not be proved. Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act deals for the presumption as to abetment to a married woman could be drawn. When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman has been abetted by her husband or any relative or her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, such presumption could be drawn only having regard to all the other circumstances of the case.
18. Here, in this case, the evidence of the cruelty could not be proved. The delay in filing the FIR itself creates a doubt though, at the time of noting the accidental death the parents were present before the police. No such complaint of cruelty or dowry or harassment has been made. The parents had the Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined occasion to give the complaint at the Hospital and even before the body was taken at their house, and after the cremation, but the parents could not find the reason for her suicide and that had led to delay in filing the complaint. Merely, because the death of the wife has occurred within a period of seven years of marriage, the accused cannot be automatically held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC by implying the presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act. There requires to be cogent evidence with regard to the cruelty.
19. Further, even if Section 113B for the presumption as to dowry death is to be drawn, there too the evidence has to be proved on record of any dowry demand. When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death and such presumption could be drawn under the provision of Section 304B of the IPC. Here, in this case, Section 304B of IPC has not been invoked, while the Sections, which have been invoked are 498A and 306 of IPC.
20. The cruelty has not been proved by the witnesses nor any harassment by way of dowry demand, has been proved. The delay in filing the complaint itself creates doubts in the prosecution case. The learned Judge has rightly therefore, concluded that the prosecution could not prove the case and therefore, has acquitted the accused on the ground that the Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1659/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/02/2025 undefined presumption, as to be established by the prosecution, has not been proved. There appears to be no perversity or illegality in the judgment passed by the learned Judge. There is no reason to upset the acquittal finding, which is consistent with the evidence on record.
21. Thus, taking into consideration the scope of the appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. and the reasons stated above, the present Criminal Appeal is dismissed. Record & Proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj/4 Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Feb 27 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 27 22:24:16 IST 2025