Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Pravin Chanabhai ... on 4 August, 2015
Author: K.J.Thaker
Bench: K.J.Thaker
R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2062 of 2004
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed Yes
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of No
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of No
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s)
Versus
PRAVIN CHANABHAI SOLANKI....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Appellant.
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA, ADVOCATE for the Opponent/Respondent.
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER
Date : 04/08/2015
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Page 1 of 8 HC-NIC Page 1 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment and order dated 5.6.2004 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 8th Fast Track Court, Rajkot in Sessions Case No.107 of 2001. The said case was registered against the present respondent original accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased had married with the accused on 17.7.1998 and they were residing at Bedi Village. In the beginning their relations were good, however, after some time the accused started to harass the deceased mentally and physically. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was having illicit relation with one Sonu @ Sonal, who was residing in their neighbourhood. Upon coming to know about illicit relations of the accused, the deceased went to her parental home, however, the accused brought her back after some time. Thereafter, the accused continued to have illicit relation with said lady and he also continued to give mental and physical harassment to the deceased. Therefore, on 23.5.2001 at 17.45 the deceased committed suicide by throwing herself before a train, viz. Somnath Mail. Therefore, an offence was registered by railway police and sent for investigation to Rajkot Taluka Police Station.
2.1 Thereafter, investigation was carried out and charge sheet came to be filed against the accused in the Court of learned Magistrate. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed Page 2 of 8 HC-NIC Page 2 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, charge came to be framed and explained to the accused, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
2.2 In order to bring home the charges against the accused person, prosecution has examined thirteen witnesses. The prosecution has also produced fifteen documents as evidence on record. 2.3 Thereafter, after filing closing purshis by the prosecution, further statement of accused person under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. The accused denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against him.
2.4 At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondent-accused. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 5.6.2004 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 8th Fast Track Court, Rajkot in Sessions Case No.107 of 2001, the appellant- State has preferred the present appeal before this Court.
3. Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP appearing for the State has submitted that the order of acquittal is against law and evidence on record. He submitted that the learned Judge has erred in not appreciating the deposition of the witnesses. He submitted that learned trial Judge Page 3 of 8 HC-NIC Page 3 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT ought to have believed the evidence of PW-4, Gangaben Kalabhai, who is the mother of the deceased. She has stated about the physical and mental cruelty given to the deceased by the accused. He also submitted that learned trial Judge ought not to have given importance to minor contradictions and omissions, which resulted into miscarriage of justice. He submitted that the learned trial Judge has committed an error in accepting the theory of accidental death on the basis of statement of the driver of the train and guard. He submitted that since the accused was having illicit relations with one Sonalben, he was harassing the deceased and that is the reasons why she has committed suicide. He also submitted that the learned Judge has erred in not properly construing and interpreting the evidence adduced by the prosecution and has erred in acquitting the accused. She, therefore, submitted that this appeal may be allowed and the impugned judgment may be reversed.
4. On the other hand, Mr.Pravin Gondaliya submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. He submitted that the lower Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and acquitted the respondent of the charges levelled against him. He also submitted that in view of latest decisions of the Apex Court, when two views are possible, this Court should not interfere with the judgment of the lower Court unless it is found to be perverse. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment may not be interfered with and it may be confirmed.
Page 4 of 8
HC-NIC Page 4 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015
R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT
5. I have heard learned APP for the appellant and Mr.Gondaliya for the respondent. I have gone through the papers produced in the case. Looking to the charge framed against the respondent accused for the offence under Sections 306 and 498-A of the IPC, the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is found by the trial Court that the witnesses were justified in stating that there was accident and even if the cause of death is seen it was severe head injury and it is nobody's case that the petitioner had reflected any injuries upon the accused. This finding of fact cannot be found fault with. Only because mother and sister of the deceased deposed that there was physical and mental cruelty given by the accused, it cannot be said that the accused was guilty of the offence as alleged. It is also found that except interested witnesses, no other independent witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. Therefore, it is rightly found that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused person. In my view, learned trial Judge has rightly acquitted the accused of the charges under Section 498-A, 306 and 114 of IPC and it cannot be said that due to respondents' provocation, instigation or abetment, the deceased has committed suicide.
6. The principles which would govern and regulate the hearing of an appeal by this Court, against an order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, have been very succinctly explained by the Apex Court in Page 5 of 8 HC-NIC Page 5 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT catena of decisions. In a recent decision in the case of Satvir Singh v. State of Delhi thru. CBI reported in AIR 2014 SC 3798, the Honourable Supreme Court has observed as under:
"19. An early but exhaustive consideration of the law in this regard is to be found in the decision of Sheo Swarup v. King Emperor wherein it was held that the power of the High Court extends to a review of the entire evidence on the basis of which the order of acquittal had been passed by the trial court and thereafter to reach the necessary conclusion as to whether order of acquittal is required to be maintained or not. In the opinion of the Privy Council no limitation on the exercise of power of the High Court in this regard has been imposed by the Code though certain principles are required to be kept in mind by the High Court while exercising jurisdiction in an appeal against an order of acquittal. The following two passages from the report in Sheo Swarup adequately sum up the situation:
"There is, in their opinion, no foundation for the view, apparently supported by the judgments of some courts in India, that the High Court has no power or jurisdiction to reverse an order of acquittal on a matter of fact, except in cases in which the lower court has 'obstinately blundered', or has 'through incompetence, stupidity or perversity' reached such 'distorted conclusions as to produce a positive miscarriage of justice,' or has in some other way so conducted itself as to produce a glaring miscarriage of justice, or has been tricked by the defence so as to produce a similar result.
(emphasis supplied) Sections 417, 418 and 423 of the Code give to the High Court full power to review at large the evidence upon which the Page 6 of 8 HC-NIC Page 6 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT order of acquittal was founded, and to reach the conclusion that upon that evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be placed upon that power, unless it be found expressly stated in the Code. But in exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusions upon fact, the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and (4) the slowness of an appellate court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses. To state this, however, is only to say that the High Court in its conduct of the appeal should and will act in accordance with rules and principles well known and recognized in the administration of justice."
20. The principles of law laid down by the Privy Council in Sheo Swarup have been consistently followed by this Court in a series of subsequent pronouncements of which reference may be illustratively made to the following: Tulsiram Kanu v. State, Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab, M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra, Khedu Mohton v. State of Bihar, Sambasivan v. State of Kerala, Bhagwan Singh v. State of M.P. and State of Goa v. Sanjay Thakran."
7. It is settled legal position that in an acquittal appeal, the Appellate Court is not required to re-write the Judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the Appellate Court is in agreement with the Page 7 of 8 HC-NIC Page 7 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015 R/CR.A/2062/2004 JUDGMENT reasons assigned by the trial Court acquitting the accused. On the touchstone of these judgments, the principles enunciated therein go to show that the finding of fact recorded in the impugned judgment cannot be said to be perverse and this view is based on facts and the law of the land. The prosecution having failed to prove the three main ingredients for bringing home the charge. In the instant case, this Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and findings recorded by the trial Court while acquitting the respondent - accused and adopting the said reasons as well as the reasons aforesaid, in my view, the impugned Judgment is just, legal and proper and requires no interference by this Court at this stage. Hence, this appeal sans merit and is required to be dismissed.
8. In the result, the appeal is hereby dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 5.6.2004 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 8th Fast Track Court, Rajkot in Sessions Case No.107 of 2001, acquitting the respondent-accused, is hereby confirmed. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the trial Court concerned forthwith. Bail and bail bond, if any, stands cancelled.
Sd/-
(K.J.THAKER, J) *malek Page 8 of 8 HC-NIC Page 8 of 8 Created On Tue Aug 11 00:28:49 IST 2015