Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Hetiben Wd/O Bhupat Kalubhai Qagi on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 183 of 2001
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
HETIBEN WD/O BHUPAT KALUBHAI QAGI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR. J. M. BUDDHBHATTI(1239) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT
And
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 21/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT)
1. The present Appeal has been filed by the State under Section-
378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined judgement and order dated 24th November 2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in Sessions Case No.78 of 2000, whereby the Trial Court acquitted the respondents from the charge levelled against them under Sections-302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "I.P.C.").
2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE OF PROSECUTION READ AS UNDER:-
2.1 Accused No. 1 - Hetibhen W/o. Bhupatbhai Kalubhai Pagi, by way of first information reported on 6th December 1999 before Lunavada Police Station, that her daughter-in-law namely Champaben (hereinafter referred to as "victim"), committed suicide in the house by hanging herself with a rope. It is so narrated by accused No. 1 in her said information-complaint that she is residing along with her mother-in-law, son Kanabhai and unmarried daughters at village Rajgad. Her son Kanabhai married with the victim 8 to 9 years prior to the said incident, who have three daughters, wherein, the eldest daughter namely Raveena is about 5 to 6 years old. As such, they all residing together, but her son Kanabhai and the victim, along with his family, residing at backside of her house.Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined 2.2 As her son Kanabhai went to Ahmedabad for labour work before few days back of the incident, since last 2-3 days prior to the incident, an unknown person used to visit the house of the victim at night and having caught by accused No. 1, then victim was scolded and further told to discontinue with such illicit relation, failing which, such act will be reported to her parents as well as her husband - son of accused No. 1. 2.3 It is further stated in her information - complaint that on the previous day to 6th December 1999, accused No. 1 disclosed aforesaid event to her son-in-law, who in turn went to the village of the victim to meet her parents. So, having felt embarrassed about the aforesaid illicit act caught by in-laws of the victim and made known to her parents, she self- strangulated with the help of rope and accordingly died at her residence.
2.4 As per the aforesaid information-complaint, such condition of the victim first saw by her daughter namely Raveena, who in turn informed this fact to her aunt namely Ratanben, happens to be the daughter of accused No. 1, who cut the rope and later on informed this fact to her mother - accused No. 1. Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined 2.5 At the first instance, on receipt of such information -
complaint, the police treated it as an Accidental Death (A.D.), having registered Entry No. 25/99, but investigation was carried out by police official, namely H. R. Mulyani and on completion of investigation and getting medical opinion, having performed post-mortem of the victim, it came to light that the cause of death found to be asphyxia due to strangulation. So, formal criminal complaint registered on 28th January 2000 and the same was conducted by ASI Mr. Mansing Rathod, who, after completion of the investigation and gathering all documentary evidence as well as recording of the statements of respective persons, filed charge-sheet against the accused i.e. accused No. 1 - mother-in-law and accused No. 2 - daughter-in-law. 2.6 Thereafter, the case was committed to the Trial Court for trial to be conducted for the offenses under Section 302 and 34 of I.P.C. against accused.
3. To bring home the charge levelled against the accused, the prosecution led the following oral as well as documentary evidence, which read as under:
3.1 ORAL EVIDENCES:Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined Sr. Particulars Exhibit No. 1. Dr. Ravi Pravinkumar 21 2. Dhulabhai Kuberbhai 26 3. Jashiben Dhulabhai 27 4. Amrutbhai Hirabhai Khant 28 5. Ramabhai Shanabhai 29 6. Shanabhai Motibhai 30 7. Ranchhodbhai Jesingbhai 31 8. Mansingbhai Himmatsinh Rathod 32 9. Harish Ranchhodlal 25 3.2 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES:
Sr. Particulars Exhibit
No.
1. Complaint 36
2. Statement of Hetiben 15
3. Inquest Panchnama 16
4. Panchnama of Scene of Offence 17
5. Panchnama of Seizure of Clothes 18
6. Cause of Death Certificate 24
7. P. M. Report 22
8. Panchnama of physical examination of 19
accused-1
9. Panchnama of physical examination of 20
accused-2
Page 5 of 18
Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
3.3 After appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution and
hearing learned advocates for the respective parties, the Trial Court found that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge levelled against the respondents accused having found several irregularities and shortcomings in the evidence of the prosecution, ultimately, acquitted the respondents accused by giving them benefit of doubt.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, the prosecution has filed the present Criminal Appeal.
5. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the appellant State at length who taken us through various oral evidence as well as documentary evidence, which are on record. We have independently examined and appreciated evidence of witnesses.
6. SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT:
6.1 Learned APP Mr. Dhagat would submit that the Trial Court has committed serious error in law when acquitted the respondents accused from the charge of murder i.e. Section 302 I.P.C. It is submitted that it is clearly established by the Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined prosecution by leading ocular and documentary evidence that victim died due to strangulation and it was not a case of suicide; thus, the accused could not have been acquitted from the charge levelled against them.
6.2 Learned APP Mr. Dhagat would submit that the prosecution examined the Investigating Officer, who collected documentary and oral evidence; thereby, it was proved on record that except accused, there would not be any other person who could have committed such a heinous crime. It is submitted that when the death of the victim occurred in the house of the accused, the burden was upon the accused to discharge that under which circumstances, the incident of so-called suicide and/or strangulation occurred, which they failed in the present case. 6.3 Learned APP Mr. Dhagat would submit that the parents of the victim supported the case of the prosecution, inasmuch as, clearly deposed that the victim was subjected to torture and there was a quarrel between the accused and the victim about alleged illicit relation of the victim with another person, such was the motive of the accused to murder the victim. 6.4 Learned APP Mr. Dhagat would further submit that the Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined prosecution has also examined Ramabhai (Exhibit 29) and his father Sanabhai (Exhibit 30), who clearly confirmed the fact that at previous midnight to the incident, they saw that the accused were beating the victim. It is submitted that when such evidence came on record, coupled with the fact that the marriage span of the victim was hardly eight to nine years, thereby, there would be a legal presumption be drawn against the accused for committing the murder of the victim, when occurred inside matrimonial home.
6.5 Lastly, learned APP Mr. Dhagat would respectfully submit that the Sessions Court without proper appreciating the evidence on record, wrongly acquitted the accused from the charges. 6.6 Making the above submissions, learned APP Mr. Dhagat would humbly request this Court to allow the present appeal.
7. No other and further submissions are made.
8. Before adverting to the issue germane in the appeal, scope and ambit of acquittal appeal by this Court filed by the State under Section-378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, needs to be taken note of. In a case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Others vs. State of Karnataka, reported in (2024) 8 SCC 149 , Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined wherein the Honourable Apex Court taking note of its previous decisions, held thus:
"39. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasadv. State of Bihar and Another, (2022) 3 SCC 471 encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering various earlier judgments and held as below:
"29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [ Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 ] " 42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, 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 Criminal Procedure Code, 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 emphasise the Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined 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 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, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court."
40. Further, in the case of H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581 this Court summarized the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC as follows:
"8.1.The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after re- appreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the Trial Court is a possible Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible."
41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:
41.1 That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;
41.2 That the same misreading/omission to evidence on record; is based on a consider material 41.3 That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.
42. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court."
(emphasis supplied)
9. Keeping in mind the aforesaid ratio, now, even after re- Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined appreciation of entire sets of evidence, and so also having gone through the impugned judgment, due to following factors, the accused could not be held guilty for commission of crime under Section 302 of I.P.C. As such, we could not find any infirmity either in findings so recorded by the Trial Court and its ultimate conclusion by which accused has been acquitted for the charge of murder i.e. Section 302 of I.P.C. The aforestated conclusion is supported by the following reasons:-
10. As per the first information received from accused No. 1 by the police (Exhibit 15), it was reported that the victim committed suicide as she was caught by the accused with other person at night in her house, that too in the absence of her husband happens to be son of accused No. 1, and according to accused, due to such reason, the victim committed suicide. Nonetheless, medical evidence, more particularly the post-mortem report (Exhibit 22) and the ocular evidence of Dr. Ravi Pranaykumar (Exhibit 21), would clearly suggest that it was not a case of suicide, but cause of death was due to strangulation. So, it would rule out possibility of suicide by victim.
11. Furthermore, accused No. 1 reported the death of the victim at about 01:15 a.m. early morning on 6th December 1999, Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined wherein, clearly stated that the incident of the alleged suicide was happened around 12:00 midnight on 5th December 1999. Whereas, Dr. Ravi, who performed the post-mortem of the dead body of the victim, confirmed that death might have happened 24 to 36 hours prior to the post-mortem. As per the record, the post-mortem undertaken at about 13:30 hours on 6th December 1999. Thus, the time of death of the victim remained undisputed on record. Nonetheless, the fact remained that heavy burden was upon the prosecution to prove that the victim died due to strangulation at the instance of the accused and no one else.
12. The prosecution failed to bring any clinching evidence on record to prove that only the accused have committed the murder of the victim, and none else. The parents of the victim though tried to support the case of the prosecution, but unable to prove the involvement of the accused in the crime, inasmuch as, they have not disclosed certain facts and events which they noticed when reached to the house of the victim on her death. The parents of the victim examined at Exhibits 26 and 27 respectively, at least confirmed the fact that the son-in-law of accused No. 1 met them at their village but told them about Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined diarrhea and vomiting of the victim. It further came from their evidence that accused No. 1 scolded their daughter - victim for alleged illicit relations. Nevertheless, they have not stated anyone else about previous torture/cruelty inflicted by the accused upon victim; rather, they presumed that due to the aforesaid event of caught her daughter by accused No. 1 and the family quarrel between them, the accused committed the murder of the victim. As such, their evidence would not inspire any confidence either to the Trial Court or on appreciation to this Court, whereby, can firmly say that the accused only guilty of committing the crime.
13. The prosecution appears to have examined son-in-law of accused No.1 namely Ranchhodbhai at Exhibit 31, wherein, he supported the case of the defence and narrated the entire set of events which he informed to the parents of the victim when visited their village. After appreciating the evidence of said Ranchhodbhai, it can be very well said that parents of the victim, during their evidence, not disclosed the fact that one Natubhai, who was present when they reached the house of the victim, who told them that the victim committed suicide and accordingly died.
Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined
14. Likewise, the evidence of one Ramabhai (Exhibit 29) and his father Sanabhai (Exhibit 30) tried to involve the accused in the crime, having deposed that they saw that there was a quarrel took place between the accused and the victim on the previous night and she was beaten by them. When their evidence were appreciated by the Trial Court and by this Court, it surfaced that there is an apparent contradiction about their say so far as the weapon used for beating of victim, inasmuch as, father Sanabhai deposed that the accused hold cudgel, whereas, son Ramabhai deposed that the accused hold wood. Furthermore, Ramabhai in his police statement admitted to have a relationship with the victim and when the husband of the victim went out of the house for work, she used to call him at her residence. Further stated by him in his police statement that he was also caught red-handed by in-laws of the victim and such incident was reported to his father, who also slapped him for committing such act. When the father and son - duo deposed before the Trial Court, changed their version and tried to implicate the accused in the crime. It remained undisputed on record that they were not eyewitnesses to the incident of murder by the accused.
Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined
15. The Trial Court has correctly observed in its finding while acquitting both accused that none of the investigating officers brought on record any clinching evidence whereby can prove the guilt of the accused; rather, no direct evidence brought on record which confirms the involvement of the accused in the crime.
16. Of course, medical evidence, does prove that it was not a case of suicide and as the cause of death was due to strangulation, but at the same time, considering the fact that the victim having relationship with other, then the possibility of the presence of other person than in-laws of the victim cannot be ruled out in the house especially when death occurred at night. Furthermore, eldest daughter of victim who first saw her mother hanging and reported it to her aunt, not examined by prosecution on pretext that she was child.
17. Thus, the Trial Court has correctly observed in its opinion that when second view is possible and in the absence of any direct evidence involving the accused in the commission of the crime, then requires to be acquitted from the charges as the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a shadow of doubt. Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined
18. When we have analyzed the aforesaid aspect of the case and even on re-appreciation of the entire set of evidence on record, we are unable to take any different view than taken by the Trial Court, inasmuch as, the prosecution miserably failed to bring on record any direct evidence which proved the guilt of the accused in the commission of the crime.
19. All these above factors would clearly suggest that there is weakness and short-comings in the case of the prosecution and the evidence led by the prosecution not inspired any confidence at least to us, whereby we can upturn decision of the Trial Court acquitting the respondents accused by giving them benefit of doubt.
20. In view of the above referred flaw in the evidence of prosecution and after going through the reasons assigned by the Trial Court, we are in complete agreement with the reasons and the view taken by the Trial Court whereby acquitted the respondents - accused.
21. Considering these set of evidences on record and in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as referred hereinabove, we are of the opinion that no error has been Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/183/2001 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined committed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra in Sessions Case No.78 of 2000 (Trial Court) while acquitting the respondents - accused.
22. This appeal found meritless, accordingly DISMISSED.
Resultantly, the impugned judgment and order of the Trial Court is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record and proceedings, be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(MAULIK J. SHELAT, J) (P. M. RAVAL, J) NILESH Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Nov 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 25 21:38:41 IST 2025