Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Mahendrasinh @ Jigo Natvarbhaigohel on 27 February, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2225 of 2009
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
MAHENDRASINH @ JIGO NATVARBHAIGOHEL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MR NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 27/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal has been filed by the State challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 22.6.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no.5, Nadiad in Sessions Case no.74 of 2008.
2. The charge was framed under Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "the IPC"). The charge states that the deceased Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined had married accused no.1-Mahendrasinh @ Jigo Natwarbhai Gohel and the matrimonial relation was of 3 years. After about one year of marriage, the complainant alleged that all the accused had started harassing the accused on the ground that she was not well-versed with the domestic work and when she conceived and was with five months' foetus, they started making false allegations regarding her character, and that mental and physical harassment has resulted into cruelty and that when it was unbearable, on 13.4.2008 at about 09 O'Clock, she consumed poison at Khodiyarpara Chhapra and committed suicide and therefore, the charge for abetment to commit suicide was framed.
3. Ms. Asmita Patel, learned APP has submitted that the Trial Court judgment is erroneous and contrary to law. The learned Judge has failed to appreciate the marriage span to draw presumption and when the witness had proved by way of their testimony the cruelty suffered by the deceased, then, the learned Judge was required to draw presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act. The learned APP has submitted that the cause of death was consumption of the poisonous substance andosalfa, which could be identified through the postmortem. Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined The learned APP has submitted that the offence becomes very serious as the deceased was having a foetus in her womb and she ended her life along with the future child. This very aspect itself proves that it was unbearable physical and mental torture, which she suffered only because of the quarrel regarding household work and further allegation that she was pregnant by way of infidelity.
4. The learned APP has submitted that the deposition of the witness-complainant - Khodabhai Chhaganbhai Parmar clarifies the cruelty suffered by the daughter. The witness - Bharatbhai Khodabhai Sodha Parmar, brother of the deceased has referred to quarrels, which often took place because of the household work. The deceased was beaten up and was subjected to physical and mental cruelty. On 12.4.2008, the accused Mahendra-husband came to the house and made allegation against the daughter who was pregnant alleging that the child was of one Lalabhai who was often making phone calls to her.
5. The witness - Sonalben Bharatbhai Sodha Parmar was also examined to prove that the deceased had informed her about the quarrels and the beatings and further about the physical and mental cruelty. The learned APP has submitted that the Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined harassment and the cruelty doubting her character, had led to such unavoidable circumstances for the deceased that she had no other alternative, but to commit suicide. The learned APP further submitted that the witness - Shanabhai Lakhabhai Sodha Parmar has also corroborated the evidence of the witnesses. The witness - Ranchhodbhai Hathibhai has deposed about the fact that he was a witness, where the father-in-law of the deceased had come to take her back and given assurance that they would not harass her from then. However, even after sending the deceased back, the harassment continued. The learned APP has submitted that the witness - Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar, against whom there is an allegation of having relation with the deceased, has categorically deposed that all the allegations were false and baseless and further the mother of the deceased Surajben Khodabhai Sodha Parmar has also given the details of the mental harassment to her with regard to household domestic work and also of the allegation against her character when her daughter was four months pregnant.
6. Countering the arguments, learned advocate Mr. Rathin P. Raval has submitted that the marriage span of 3 years cannot be Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined made as a conclusive evidence to draw presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act for alleging abetment of suicide. Mr. Raval has submitted that whole circumstances of the case is required to be examined to consider the case for the charge of cruelty and abetment of suicide. Learned advocate Mr. Raval has relied upon the judgment in the case of Naresh Kumar v. State of Haryana, reported in (2024) 3 SCC 573 to support his argument for the provision under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 306 of IPC. Mr. Raval has submitted that now it has become well-settled by way of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court that to convict a person under Section 306 of the IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. Mr. Raval has submitted that there is no direct evidence of the person alleging harassment. The span of 3 years of marriage shows that initial first year was very smooth. Had there been any cause for not knowing the household work, then that could have been from the very beginning, while that is not the case here. Mr. Raval has submitted that the prosecution refers to the allegation that the deceased was having relation with Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar who had been examiend as PW7 at Exh.28. Mr. Raval has submitted that the cause of suicide was not the present accused, but the parents themselves and PW7 and Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined cousin brother of the deceased who had beaten Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar. Referring to the evidence of Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar who had admitted of his love relation with the deceased Shobhanaben in his evidence in chief and has also admitted that he was often seeing and meeting the deceased. After the marriage, he states that he has stopped his relation. Mr. Raval, referring to the evidence, stated that cousin brother of the deceased i.e. the nephew of the complainant actually were doubting him and had taken him to task and therefore, the witness had left the place and had started leaving with Tandel Maganbhai Devabhai. Mr. Raval has also drawn attention of the Court that the reference has been made about the mobile phone and the police had called to record the statement of the witness since the police was having the knowledge of his relations with the deceased Shobhanaben. As per the evidence, one or two days prior to the death of Shobhanaben, he had gone to stay at Tandel's Village. The very fact itself is very clear that there was some dispute between the deceased and the family members and the cousins of the deceased that had led to a situation, where the deceased had no other alternative, but to commit suicide and thus, stated that the instigation was from the parental side. Mr. Raval has Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined submitted that on the day prior of committing suicide, the witness was called upon at the house of Shobhanaben to inquire the fact, whether he was having relations with the deceased and he has also admitted in the cross-examination that since the love relation between the witness - Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar and the deceased got disclosed, the family members of the deceased had beaten him. After visiting their house, he had left the Village since he was under fear that the family members of Shobhanaben would beat him.
7. Heard Ms. Asmita Patel, learned APP and learned advocate Mr. Raval, perused the judgment of the learned Trial Court Judge. The learned Judge had made threadbare examination of the evidence of the witnesses. The complainant, though states about mental and physical cruelty, but he is not a direct witness to any statement given by the deceased Shobhanaben. The fact of cruelty he states was informed to him by his wife. Thus, this very fact does not get corroborated as direct evidence from the complainant. According to the complainant, on 8.4.2008, six months' prior, there was a quarrel between the parents-in-law and her daughter Shobhanaben and therefore, she had come to their house, but she has not informed the cause of the quarrel to Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined them and when the father-in-law of the daughter had come to take her back, the person who had facilitated the marriage, Shakarabhai was also present there and in his presence, witness states that the assurance was given that she would not be harassed thereafter. It requires to be noted that Shakara Desaibhai has not been examined as a witness. The further evidence refers that on 12.4.2008, accused no.1 and his brother- in-law - Dilip had come in a rickshaw and had got excited to inform that there were phones coming on the mobile of the deceased and the evidence shows that husband and the brother- in-law had after settlement, proposed to take the deceased home back, but the deceased had denied to return back to the matrimonial house. The evidence, at this juncture, of Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar - PW7 bears much importance since he states that on the earlier day of the death of the deceased, he was called at the house of Shobhanaben to inquire about their relation and he had admitted of his relation with the deceased - Shobhanaben and there he was beaten by the cousins of the deceased Shobhanaben. It appears that Shobhanaben was taken back at the matrimonial home by the husband and on the very next day i.e. 13.4.2008, she consumed poison and committed suicide. The evidence of harassment in the form of cruelty does Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined not get proved since it could not be believed through the evidence of the witnesses that the deceased was harassed for not knowing household work. The evidence states that for a period of one year, the matrimonial life was easy and smooth. It was only when she was receiving phone calls that the dispute arose and such fact gets proved itself by the evidence of Laljibhai Pratapbhai Sodha Parmar, which substantiates the fact that the witness was in relation with the deceased and on the day earlier of committing suicide, PW7 was called at the deceased's house and when the relationship was disclosed in front of all, PW7 was beaten. The statement of PW7 was recorded by the police and therefore, such facts could come on record. Merely because death of the wife has occurred within a period of seven years of the marriage, the accused cannot be automatically held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC by employing presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act. The circumstance, which has been brought on record by way of examining PW7, itself proves that the deceased had committed suicide not because of any other fact, which could be considered as a cruelty rather when the evidence shows that the husband and the brother-in-law had come there to take the deceased back, but that was the day, where the relation of Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2225/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined the deceased with PW7 got disclosed in front of all and that was the reason, which becomes apparent on record for the deceased to commit suicide. The evidence of PW7 cannot be ignored as he has stated about his relation with the deceased and instead of knowing all these facts, the husband was ready to take her back to the matrimonial house. The circumstance, thus, which has been brought on record by the evidence of PW7, rebuts the presumption. The learned Trial Court Judge has given his reasoning while appreciating the evidence on record and this Court does not find any illegality or perversity to the appreciation of the evidence and findings.
8. This Court does not find any reason to interfere in the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court acquitting the accused. The appeal thus stands dismissed.
(GITA GOPI,J) Maulik Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Sat Mar 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 03 22:08:40 IST 2025