Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Jadeja Bharatsinh Bhagwanji on 31 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 242 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
JADEJA BHARATSINH BHAGWANJI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HR PRAJAPATI(674) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NISHKA H PRAJAPATI(10717) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR.BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR DHARMESH V SHAH(1050) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 31/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patan (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 61 of 2006 on 03.03.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498-A and 114 of Indian Penal Code, Page 1 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and Sections 3 and 7 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as "Dowry Act"
for short).
1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused in the rank and file as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 That the marriage of the deceased Hetalba had taken place with the accused No. 1 around twelve months prior to the incident and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased Hetalba. The accused would torture and harass deceased- Hetalba to bring jewelry and money from her parental house and on 18/04/2006, the deceased sprinkled kerosene on herself and committed suicide. Her father - Kirtising Mohabatsing Solanki filed a complaint on the same day under Sections 498-A, 306 and 114 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 7 of the Prevention of Dowry Act, which was registered at C.R.No. 22 of 2006 at Santalpur Police Station.
2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed before the learned Judicial Page 2 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined Magistrate First Class, Radhanpur and as the offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Patan as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and case was registered Sessions Case No. 61 of 2006.
2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 17 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exh. 18 to 20 respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution produced 8 oral evidences and 13 documentary evidences to bring home the charge against the accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis at Exh. 46, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box but examined the following witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them.
Page 3 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined ORAL EVIDENCE Sr. Defense Name of the Witness Exhibit No. Witness No. 1 1 Ganeshbhai Medlaji Rabari 53 2 2 Bharatsinh Pratapsinh Rathod 55 3 3 Bachubhai VadilalShah 56 4 4 Vishnudan Naghjibhai 59 5 5 Anilbhai Muktibhai Soni 62 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Sr. Particulars Exhibit No. 1 Rent- receipt 54 2 Certificate 56 3 X-ray report 60 4 Report of Dr. Kishandan Zala 61 5 Bill of jewelry dated 07/04/2006 63 6 Bill of jewelry dated 07/04/2006 64 2.5 After the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned trial Court by the impugned judgment and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from all the charges leveled against him.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed Page 4 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and during cross-examination, nothing adverse has been elicited in favour of the respondents. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondents and the judgement and order of acquittal is unwarranted, illegal and without any basis in the eyes of law and the reasons stated while acquitting the respondent are improper, perverse and bad in law. Hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya for the appellant-State with learned advocate Mr. H.R.Prajapati original complainant, and learned advocate Mr. Dharmesh Shah for the respondents. Perused the impugned judgement and order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya with learned advocate Mr. H.R. Prajapati has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case and have submitted that the learned trial Court has not appreciated that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubts and the witnesses have supported the case of Page 5 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined the prosecution and it is also proved that deceased Hetalba died due to extensive burns which was 91% over her body. That the learned trial Court has relied upon the evidence adduced by the accused that there was no cruelty by them to the deceased but the evidence of the prosecution has proved otherwise and the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated this evidence. That in-fact, there is sufficient material to show that deceased Hetalba was subjected to cruelty by the respondents and she had committed suicide shortly after her marriage and, hence, the learned APP has urged this Court that the impugned judgement and order is improper, perverse and bad in law and deserves to be quashed and set aside.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Dharmesh Shah for the respondents has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidences and passed the impugned judgement and order of acquittal which is just and proper and no interference is required in the same and learned Advocate for the respondents has urged this court to reject the appeal of the appellant.
7. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court regarding acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Page 6 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu v. State of M.P., (2006) 10 SCC 313 : AIR 2006 SC 831, this Court stated; "While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power exercised while hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the trial court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the trial court". (emphasis supplied) From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of 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 phraseology 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 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 available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal Page 7 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 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, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
7.1 The Apex Court in yet another recent decision in case of Sri Dattatraya Vs. Sharanappa arising out of Criminal Appeal No. 3257 of 2024 (@ SLP (Crl.) No. 13179 of 2023) observed as under:
31. The instant case pertains to challenge against concurrent findings of fact favoring the acquittal of the respondent, it would be cogent to delve into an analysis of the principles underlining the exercise of power to adjudicate a challenge against acquittal bolstered by concurrent findings. The following broad principles can be culled out after a comprehensive analysis of judicial pronouncements:
i) Criminal jurisprudence emphasizes on the fundamental essence of liberty and presumption of innocence unless proven guilty. This presumption gets emboldened by virtue of concurrent findings of acquittal. Therefore, this court must be extra-cautious while dealing with a challenge against acquittal as the said presumption gets reinforced by virtue of a well-
reasoned favorable outcome. Consequently, the onus on the prosecution side becomes more burdensome pursuant to the said double presumption.
ii) In case of concurrent findings of acquittal, this Court would ordinarily not interfere with such view considering the principle of liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India 1950, unless perversity is blatantly forthcoming and there are compelling reasons.
iii) Where two views are possible, then this Court would not ordinarily interfere and reverse the concurrent findings of acquittal. However, where the situation is such that the only conclusion which could be arrived at from a comprehensive appraisal of evidence, shows that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice, then, notwithstanding such concurrent Page 8 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined view, this Court would not restrict itself to adopt an oppugnant view. [Vide State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dan Singh]
iv) To adjudge whether the concurrent findings of acquittal are 'perverse' it is to be seen whether there has been failure of justice. This Court in Babu v. State of Kerala clarified the ambit of the term 'perversity' as "if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/admissible material. The finding may also be said to be perverse if it is 'against the weight of evidence', or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality."
v) In situations of concurrent findings favoring accused, interference is required where the trial court adopted an incorrect approach in framing of an issue of fact and the appellate court whilst affirming the view of the trial court, lacked in appreciating the evidence produced by the accused in rebutting a legal presumption. [Vide Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh]
vi) Furthermore, such interference is necessitated to safeguard interests of justice when the acquittal is based on some irrelevant grounds or fallacies in re-appreciation of any fundamental evidentiary material or a manifest error of law or in cases of non-adherence to the principles of natural justice or the decision is manifestly unjust or where an acquittal which is fundamentally based on an exaggerated adherence to the principle of granting benefit of doubt to the accused, is liable to be set aside. Say in cases where the court severed the connection between accused and criminality committed by him upon a cursory examination of evidences. [Vide State of Punjab v. Gurpreet Singh and Others and Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar.]
8. The law with regard to acquittal appeals is well crystallized and in acquittal appeals, there is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and it has finally culminated when a case ends in an acquittal. That the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and when the learned Trial Court has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts, the presumption of Page 9 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened. That there is no inhibition to re appreciate the evidence by the Appellate Court but if after re appreciation, the view taken by the learned Trial Court was a possible view, there is no reason for the Appellate Court to interfere in the same.
9. The accused have been charged with the offence under Section 306 of the IPC and with regard to Section 306 of the IPC, it would be fit to reproduce the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase vs The State of Madhya Pradhesh passed in Criminal Appeal No. 221/2025 (@ SLP(Cr) No. 11868/2023) on 17.01.2025 and the relevant paragraphs 11 to 17 are as under:
11. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:-
"306. Abetment of suicide. If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
12. Section 107 of the IPC reads as under:- "
107. Abetment of a thing.-A person abets the doing of a thing, who- First. - Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly. - Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly. - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
As is clear from the plain language of the Sections to attract the ingredient of Section 306, the accused should have abetted the commission of a suicide. A person abets the doing of a thing who Firstly - instigates any person to do that Page 10 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined thing or Secondly - engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing or Thirdly - intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
13. In Swamy Prahaladdas vs. State of M.P. and Another, [1995 Supp (3) SCC 438], the appellant remarked to the deceased that 'go and die' and the deceased thereafter, committed suicide. This Court held that:-
"3. ...Those words are casual nature which are often employed in the heat of the moment between quarreling people. Nothing serious is expected to follow thereafter. The said act does not reflect the requisite 'mens rea' on the assumption that these words would be carried out in all events. ..."
14. In Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and Another, (2010) 8 SCC 628, this Court held that in order to bring out an offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. It was further held that the intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for attracting Section 306.
15. In Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, this Court held as under:-
"12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. [Emphasis supplied]
16. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306 IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved and established by the prosecution Page 11 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC.
17. M. Mohan vs. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626 followed Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, wherein it was held as under:-
41. This Court in SCC para 20 of Ramesh Kumar has examined different shades of the meaning of "instigation". Para 20 reads as under: (SCC p. 629) "20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do 'an act'. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
In the said case this Court came to the conclusion that there is no evidence and material available on record wherefrom an inference of the appellant-accused having abetted commission of suicide by Seema (the appellant's wife therein) may necessarily be drawn." Thereafter, this Court in Mohan (supra) held:-
45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court are clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide."
[Emphasis supplied] In the case of Prakash and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra passed in Criminal Appeal No. 5543 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 1073 of 2023) decided on 20.12.2024 in paras 12 to 22, the Apex Court has observed under:
12. The relevant provisions of the IPC that fall for consideration are as under:Page 12 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined "306. Abetment of suicide.- If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
107. Abetment of a thing--A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- First.-- Instigates any person to do that thing;
or Secondly.-- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.
-- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.-- A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing Explanation 2.-- Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act."
13. Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of suicide by one person and second, the abetment to the said act by another person(s). In order to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, it must necessarily be proved that the accused person has contributed to the suicide by the deceased by some direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC has to be satisfied.
14. Section 306 read with Section 107 of IPC, has been interpreted, time and again, and its principles are well- established. To attract the offence of abetment to suicide, it is important to establish proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such instigation or incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide and should put the victim in such a position that he/she would have no other option but to commit suicide.
15. The law on abetment has been crystallized by a plethora of decisions of this Court. Abetment involves a mental Page 13 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined process of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to do a particular thing. To bring a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, the act of abetment would require the positive act of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide. Without such mens rea on the part of the accused person being apparent from the face of the record, a charge under the aforesaid Section cannot be sustained. Abetment also requires an active act, direct or indirect, on the part of the accused person which left the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide.
16. This Court in the case of S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and Another 12, had an occasion to consider the scope of Section 306 of the IPC and the ingredients which are essential for abetment, as set out in Section 107 of the IPC. It observed as follows:
"16. The word "suicide" in itself is nowhere defined in the Penal Code, however its meaning and import is well known and requires no explanation. "Sui" means "self" and "cide"
means "killing", thus implying an act of self-killing. In short, a person committing suicide must commit it by himself, irrespective of the means employed by him in achieving his object of killing himself.
...........
18. In our country, while suicide in itself is not an offence, considering that the successful offender is (2010) 12 SCC 190 : 2010 INSC 506 beyond the reach of law, attempt to suicide is an offence under Section 309 IPC.
..........
21. The learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Mahendra Singh v. State of M.P. [1995 Supp (3) SCC 731 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 1157] In Mahendra Singh [1995 Supp (3) SCC 731 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 1157] the allegations levelled were as under: (SCC p. 731, para 1) "1. ... My mother-in-law and husband and sister-in- law (husband's elder brother's wife) harassed me. They beat me and abused me. My husband Mahendra wants to marry a second time. He has illicit connections with my sister-in-law. Because of these reasons and being harassed I want to die by burning." The Court on the aforementioned allegations came to a definite conclusion that by no stretch the ingredients of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased. According to the appellant, the conviction of the appellant Page 14 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined under Section 306 IPC merely on the basis of the aforementioned allegation of harassment of the deceased is unsustainable in law.
...........
23. In State of W.B. v. Orilal Jaiswal [(1994) 1 SCC 73 : 1994 SCC (Cri) 107] this Court has cautioned that:
(SCC p. 90, para 17) "17. ... The court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it [appears] to the court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."
24. This Court in Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) [(2009) 16 SCC 605 : (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 367] had an occasion to deal with this aspect of abetment. The Court dealt with the dictionary meaning of the words "instigation" and "goading". The Court opined that there should be intention to provoke, incite or encourage the doing of an act by the latter. Each person's suicidability pattern is different from the other. Each person has his own idea of self- esteem and self-respect. Therefore, it is impossible to lay down any straitjacket formula in dealing with such cases. Each case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances.
25. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide." Page 15 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined
17. This Court held that abetment involves the mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Therefore, without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid a person in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. This Court further observed that the intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 of IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. Abetment also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no other option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide. However, this Court has cautioned that since each person reacts differently to the same provocation depending on a variety of factors, it is impossible to lay down a straight-jacket formula to deal with such cases. Therefore, every such case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances.
18. More recently, in the case of Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda and Others v. State of Gujarat13, this Court has 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3679 : 2024 INSC 960 relied on S.S. Chheena (supra) to hold that the element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred, instead it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law, that is deliberate and conspicuous intention to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide, would remain unfulfilled. This Court observed as follows:
"18. For a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, it is a well-established legal principle that the presence of clear mens rea--the intention to abet the act--is essential. Mere harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find an accused guilty of abetting suicide. The prosecution must demonstrate an active or direct action by the accused that led the deceased to take his/her own life. The element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law is not satisfied, underscoring the necessity of a deliberate and conspicuous intent to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide."
19. It is, therefore, evident that the positive act of instigation is a crucial element of abetment. While dealing with an issue Page 16 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined of a similar nature, this Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh,14 laid down the parameters of what (2001) 9 SCC 618 : 2001 INSC 515 would be constituted to be an act of instigation. This Court observed as follows:- "20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
20. It could thus be seen that this Court observed that instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". It has been held that in order to satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence, however, a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Applying the law to the facts of the case, this Court went on to hold that a word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
21. Relying on the decision in the case of Ramesh Kumar (supra), this Court in the case of Ude Singh and Others v. State of Haryana15 observed as follows:
"16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be disputed that the question of cause of a suicide, particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted and complex attributes of human behavior and responses/reactions. In the case of accusation for abetment of suicide, the court would be looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide, mere allegation Page 17 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there be such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide; and such an offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. Whether a person has abetted in the commission of suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from the facts and circumstances of each case.
16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted commission of suicide by another, the consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions above referred, instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of the accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a (2019) 17 SCC 301 : 2019 INSC 810 similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation which leads the deceased perceiving no other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four corners of Section 306 IPC. If the accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-respect of the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit suicide, the accused may be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour, each case is required to be examined on its own facts, while taking note of all the surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and psyche of the accused and the deceased.
16.2. We may also observe that human mind could be affected and could react in myriad ways; and impact of one's action on the mind of another carries several imponderables. Similar actions are dealt with differently by different persons; and so far a particular person's reaction to any other human's action is concerned, there is no specific theorem or yardstick to Page 18 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined estimate or assess the same. Even in regard to the factors related with the question of harassment of a girl, many factors are to be considered like age, personality, upbringing, rural or urban set-ups, education, etc. Even the response to the ill action of eve teasing and its impact on a young girl could also vary for a variety of factors, including those of background, self-confidence and upbringing. Hence, each case is required to be dealt with on its own facts and circumstances."
22. It could thus be seen that this Court observed that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. It has been held that since the cause of suicide particularly in the context of the offence of abetment of suicide involves multifaceted and complex attributes of human behaviour, the court would be looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. This Court further observed that a mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there is such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide. This Court also emphasized that such an offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. It was further clarified that the question of mens- rea on the part of the accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the accused. It was further held that if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the accused intended nothing more than harassment or a snap-show of anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide, however, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. This Court held that owing to the fact that the human mind could be affected and could react in myriad ways and that similar actions are dealt with differently by different persons, each case is required to be dealt with its own facts and circumstances.
10. In light on the above settled principles of law and considering the evidence on the prosecution, to bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No.1 - Kirtising Mohabatsing at Exh.23 and the witness is the complainant who Page 19 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined has stated that his daughter Hetalba was married to the accused No. 1 about twelve months prior to the incident and she had come to her parental house about fifteen days before the incident where she had narrated about the cruelty meted out to her by the accused. That he had sent her back to her matrimonial home and on the day of the incident, he was told that his daughter was burnt. That he had filed the complaint which is produced at Exh.24. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that in the complaint he had not stated that he had a talk with Bhagwanji about any dowry to be given. That his daughter was married with the accused No. 1 on 25/05/2005 and after marriage, she had come back to her parental house and had gone to her matrimonial home for fifteen days and his brother Pravinsing and his son Siddhraj had gone and brought her back and thereafter she had returned to her matrimonial home on Asadhi Bij, when her uncle-in-law had come to take her and she resided in her matrimonial home for about one and half months and thereafter had returned to her parental home as his Son Siddhraj had gone to bring her. That she stayed at her parental home for two months and on 13/10/2005, on the day of Dashera, the accused No. 2 and his daughter Ansuyuaben came to take Hetalba and at that time she stayed for one and half months in her matrimonial home. That once again, his son Siddhraj went and Page 20 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined brought her back home and she resided for one month at her parental home and thereafter went back to her matrimonial home but on Kartik Poonam his son went and brought her back to her parental home. That the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are residing at Dantiwada as the accused No. 2 is working at Dantiwada. 10.1 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 2 - Parashben Jijarsinh at Exh.25 and the witness is the panch witness of the inquest Panchnama, which is produced at Exh.26.
10.2 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 3 - Pravinsinh Mohabatsinh Solanki at Exh. 27 and the witness is the uncle of the deceased, who has stated that he has not met anyone about the cruelty to Hetalba and he came to know about her death through his sister Vasuba.
During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that on 18/04/2006, his brother Manuji told him that Hetalba was burnt and at that time no one was at home. 10.3 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 4 - Solanki Manuji Mohabatji at Exh. 29 and the witness is the uncle of the deceased, who has stated that, on 18/04/2006, he was informed on the telephone that Hetalba was burnt and they went to the hospital and saw her dead body. During the cross examination by the learned advocate for Page 21 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined the accused, the witness has admitted that they were informed that Hetalba was burnt.
10.4 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 5 - Solanki Batukji Mafaji at Exh. 30 and the witness is the cousin of deceased Hetalba, who has stated that he was informed on 18/04/2006 that Hetalba was burnt and she has expired and they all took a private vehicle and went to the village but found that she was taken to the hospital at Santalpur and they went to the hospital and shaw her dead body. During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has denied that Hetalba expired due to the cruelty by the accused.
10.5 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 6 - Shantaben Kirtisinh at Exh. 31 and the witness is the mother of the deceased, who has stated that her daughter was married with the accused No. 1 one year prior to the incident and she had come to her parental home fifteen days before the incident. That she had gone back as the grandmother-in-law of Hetalba had sustained a fracture and thereafter they came to know that she was burnt and they had gone to the hospital where they saw her daughter fully burnt.
During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that her husband did not have a job. Page 22 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 10.6 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 7 - Somjibhai Valjibhai Ninama at Exh.32 and the witness is the Investigating Officer who has narrated in detail all the procedure that was undertaken by him during the investigation of the offence. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that prior to filing of the complaint, a telephone call was received by the PSO that one lady from the village was burnt but the name of the person who had telephoned was not given and hence it was not noted in the telephone register. That he had recorded the statements of the neighbors but he has not shown them as witnesses in the chargesheet.
10.7 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 8 - Dr. Kumar Kundan at Exh.43 and the witness is the Medical Officer, who has conducted the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased on 19/04/2006. The witness has stated that there were extensive epidermal burns from head to toe all over the body, except few parts of back and back of head and some of parts of soles of both legs and redness was present at all burn parts of the body. The burn was about 91 % and they were antemortem in nature and the cause of death was "cardio- respiratory arrest due to asphyxia, a shock produced by extensive burns Page 23 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined all over the body". The witness has produced the postmortem report at Exh.44.
11. After the evidence of the prosecution was taken on record the learned Additional Public Prosecution filed the closing pursis at Exh.46, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded wherein, the accused has stated that they were innocent and they had not ill-treated the deceased at any point of time and she was mostly in her parental home. That the accused Nos. 2 & 3 were not residing with the deceased and were residing at Dantiwada as the accused No. 2 was a Head Constable in the Border Wing and the accused No. 3 - his wife was residing with him. That on 07/04/2006, the accused No. 1 had taken the deceased to the jeweler at Santalpur and had purchased silver anklets and had given an order for gold chain and a false case has been filed against them. The accused have not stepped into the witness box but have examined five witnesses and have produced six documentary evidences on record. 11.1 The accused have examined Defense Witness No. 1 Ganeshji Medalji Rabari at Exh. 53 , who is the owner of the house, where, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are residing at Dantiwada and he has produced the rent receipt at Exh. 54.
Page 24 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 11.2 The accused have examined Defense Witness No. 2 Bharatsinh Pratapsinh Rathod at Exh. 55, and the witness has stated that he has a vehicle No. GJ-08-2259 and the accused No. 1 was working at his place and on the day of the incident, the accused was on duty, when he was informed about the incident and he immediately left. 11.3 The accused have examined Defense Witness No. 3 Bachubhai Vadilal Shah at Exh. 56, a Medical Officer and was working in the Santalpur Government Dispensary and he has produced the medical papers of the deceased dated 07/04/2006 and 15/04/2006. The witness had treated the deceased and she had complained of stomach ache and joint ache and the medical certificate is produced at Exh. 58. 11.4 The accused have examined Defense Witness No. 4 Dr. Vishnudan Naghjibhai at Exh. 59 and the witness is the Medical Officer, who has stated that Roopalben Ganeshbhai Jadeja had sustained a fracture of the femur on 25/03/2006 and he has produced the X-ray at Exh. 60 and the receipt of X-ray charge at Exh. 61 11.5 The accused have examined Defense Witness No. 5 Anilbhai Muktibhai Soni at Exh. 62 and the witness has stated that he is a jeweler and doing gold business at Santalpur. On 07/104/2006, the accused No.1 and his wife Hetalba had come to his shop and purchased silver anklets worth Rs.4090/- and the accused No. 1 had paid cash and the bill for the Page 25 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined same is produced at Exh. 63. That they had placed an order for a gold chain and the accused No. 1 had given advance of Rs.25,000/- and the receipt is produced at Exh. 64.
12. On minute dissection of the entire evidence of the prosecution it is the complaint of the complainant that his daughter was tortured and harassed by the accused for dowry and hence within a period of about one year from her marriage she sprinkled kerosene on her herself and burnt herself in her matrimonial home and the accused have abetted and instigated the deceased to commit suicide. The prosecution must prove that the accused have instigated the deceased to commit suicide and they have engaged with each other in the conspiracy for abetting the deceased to commit suicide and have intentionally aided, by any act or illegal omission the committing of suicide by the deceased. If the evidence of the complainant it perused the complainant has stated that during marriage they had given dowry as per their custom, and the dowry was less for the accused, but he has not specified as to what was given in dowry. The witness has also stated that he had spoken to the accuse No. 2 about the dowry, but the accused No. 2 told him that they were not ready to give any dowry and this discussion had taken place about two months prior to the incident. In the complaint which is produced at Ex 24, the complainant has stated that the accused used to tell the deceased Page 26 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined to bring jewelry and money, but no items of jewelry or amount of money is specified in the complaint. PW6, Shantaben Kirtisinh, the mother of the deceased has stated that they had given jewelry as per their condition, but nothing is specified as to what items of jewelry were given to the deceased. The prosecution has not produced any oral or documentary evidence to show that they had in fact given dowry to the accused. The complainant and the family members examined by the prosecution have merely stated that the deceased was harassed, but they have not narrated any particular incident that had occurred or the manner of harassment that was meted out to the deceased. The witnesses have merely made allegations that dowry was demanded, and the deceased was harassed for dowry but there is no direct or indirect proof that there were any acts of harassment to the deceased to such an extent that she was incited to commit suicide.
12.1 From the deposition of the complainant, it has emerged on record that after the marriage of the deceased on 20.05.2005 the deceased stayed in her matrimonial home for 15 days and as per their custom, she was brought back to her parental house by her brother Siddhraj and her uncle Pravinsinh where she stayed for 1 1/2 months. That she went to her matrimonial home on Ashadhi Beej as the brother of her father-in-law had come to take her and she stayed at her matrimonial home for about 1 Page 27 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 1/2 month. That the complainant had sent his son, Siddhrajsinh to bring the deceased and she came and stayed at her paternal home for two months. Thereafter on Dussehra, that is on 13.10.2005 the accused No. 2 and his daughter Ansuyaben came and took the deceased to her matrimonial house where she lived for 1 1/2 months and his son Siddhrajsinh went and brought her back to her parental home. That she went and stayed for one month in her matrimonial home, and once again on Kartik Poonam his son Siddhrajsinh went and brought her back to her parental home. That she stayed till February as the marriage of her sister in law was fixed on 17.02.2006. From the evidence it appears that the deceased did not reside in her matrimonial home for more than one a half month at a stretch and during her matrimonial life she only stayed in her matrimonial home for about five to six months. 12.2 It is the say of the accused that the accused Nos. 2 and 3 were not residing with the deceased and the accused No. 1, and the accused No. 2 was a Head Constable in the Border Wing and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 were residing at Dantiwada. The accused have examined Defence Witness No. 1 who has stated that the accused Nos. 2 and 3 were residing at in his house on rent and he has produced the Rent Receipt at exhibit 54. Page 28 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined
13. On minute re-appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution and the impugned judgment and order, it appears that the learned Trial Court has thoroughly appreciated all the evidence on record and has given due consideration to all the material pieces of evidence. The learned Trial Court has discussed all the oral as well as documentary evidences and if the evidence produced by the prosecution is examined in light of the law laid down Mahendra Awase (supra) and Prakash (supra), it appears that the learned Trial Court has arrived at findings which are legal and proper and there are no errors of law or facts. Moreover, the view taken by the learned Trial Court in acquitting the accused is fairly possible and there is no illegality and perversity in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
14. In view of the settled position of law, the learned trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned trial Court and this Court is in complete Page 29 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/242/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed.
15. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patan (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 61 of 2006 on 03.03.2007, is hereby confirmed.
16. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) VVM Page 30 of 30 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:28 IST 2025