Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ismailbhai @ Bhurabhai Rasid Bhai ... on 28 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1595 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ISMAILBHAI @ BHURABHAI RASID BHAI SHEIKH & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS.JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR G R MANAV for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
NON BAILABLE WARRANT UNSERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 28/02/2025
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, Fast Track Court No. 1, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 94 of 2007 on 29-02-2008, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 and Page 1 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short). 1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as "the accused" 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. The accused No. 1 is the father-in-law, accused No. 2 is the brother-in-law, accused No. 3 is the sister-in-law and accused No. 4 is the mother-in-law of the deceased Rehana wife of Iqbalbhai Bhurabhai Sheikh. On 14th May 2006, Rehana Iqbalbhai Sheikh filed the complaint from V.S.Hospital stating that six months prior to the incident, she had a remarriage with Iqbalbhai Bhurabhai Sheikh and after marriage, the accused kept her well for two months but thereafter they were physically and mentally harassing her and on 13th May 2006, they had a quarrel with her about cooking food. On 14th May 2006, her husband was asleep and her mother-in-law and sister-in-law had gone to fill water and her father-in-law and brother-in-law had gone out and as she was fed up of the torture, she took the kerosene cane lying below the water area and sprinkled kerosene on herself and set herself ablaze. That as she started shouting, her husband woke up and the other family members and Page 2 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined neighbours rushed in and threw water and a quilt on her and immediately rushed her in an ambulance to the hospital and she was admitted for treatment in the burns ward. Rehana Iqbalbhai Sheikh expired on 21st May 2006 during treatment at 22:00 hours and the complaint was registered under Sections 498-A, 306 and 114 of the IPC at Kagdapith Police Station, I-C.R.No. 210 of 2006.
2.2] The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and collected the necessary documents and after completion of investigation the police filed the chargesheet against the accused before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amod and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Bharuch as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered Special (ATRO) Case No. 6 of 2005.
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. 6 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Page 3 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined Exhs. 7 to 10, 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 ten oral evidences and fifteen documentary evidences to bring home the charge against the accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis at Exh.11, 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 or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. 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 them.
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 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, Page 4 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined nothing adverse has been elicited in favour of the respondent. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondent 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 and learned advocate Mr. G.R.Manav appearing for the respondent No.2-
original accused. 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 has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case and submitted that the judgment and order of acquittal is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned trial Court has not appreciated the direct and indirect evidence in the case. That the complainant has supported the case of the prosecution, which is corroborated by the deposition of the medical officer and the witnesses have identified the accused before the learned Page 5 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined trial Court. The prosecution has fully proved the case beyond reasonable doubts but the learned trial Court has relied on minor contradictions and has given undue weightage with regard to the place of incident. That the order passed by the learned trial Court is illegal, improper and perverse and is required to be quashed and set aside and the appeal of the appellant must be allowed.
6. Learned advocate Mr. G.R.Manav appearing for the respondents- original accused submits that the judgments and orders have been passed after appreciation of all the evidence and the learned Court has appreciated the evidence in proper perspective and hence, the appeal of the appellant-State must be rejected.
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 in acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of 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 Page 6 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined 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 phraseologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of 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 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..
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. Page 7 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined 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 innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened. There is no inhibition to re appreciate the evidence by the Appellate Court but if after re appre- ciation, 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. As the appeal pertains to a case under Section 306 of the IPC, it would be appropriate to reproduce the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase vs The State of Madhya Pradhesh Criminal Appeal No. 221/2025 (@ SLP(Cr) No. 11868/2023) passed on 17th January, 2025 which is 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."Page 8 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined 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 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 Page 9 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined 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 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 where-from 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]
10. In light of the above settled principles of law, the evidence on record of the case is appreciated and the prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 1, Aasambhai Subhrati Rangrej at Exhibit 12 Page 10 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined and the witness is the panch witness of the panchnama produced at Exhibit 13, whereby the clothes of the deceased were seized by the Investigating Officer. The witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile.
10.1 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 2 Hanifbhai Majidbhai Sheikh at Exhibit 14 and the witness is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of offense produced at Exhibit 15. The witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile.
10.2 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 3 Noorbibi Hussainbhai Sheikh at Exhibit 17 and the witness is the mother of the deceased Rehana Iqbalbhai Sheikh, who has stated that as her son-in-law was not working. The accused used to harass her and whenever her daughter Rehana would come to her house, on occasions, she would inform her about the same. That on the date of the incident, she was at her home when two persons came to call her and told her that she should go to V.S. Hospital and she went to the V.S. Hospital with her son Pir Muhammad and went into the burns ward and saw that her daughter was burnt. Her daughter told her that she had set herself ablaze as the accused were harassing her.
Page 11 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that her husband Hussainbhai has left her and her children and has gone to Rajasthan and has not returned. That, her daughter was married two years ago with Yusuf Manohar Sheikh at Shah Alam and had taken a talaq from him. That the accused had one house near Bombay Hotel and her daughter and son-in-law were staying separately in the house near Bombay Hotel. That her daughter and son-in- law would occasionally visit her house and there was no problem between them and they were staying separately in the house. That four days prior to the incident, they had come to her house and had visited her two days prior to the incident also. That the incident occurred immediately thereafter and she did not meet her daughter at that time. That even when she went to the hospital, her daughter was semi- conscious due to the burns.
10.3 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 4 Dr. Rohit Kumar Chimanlal Jhariwala at Exhibit 18 and the witness is the medical officer, who has performed the post-mortem on the dead body of deceased Rehana, wife of Iqbalbhai Sheikh on 22-05-2006. The witness has stated that, as per the post-mortem note in column No.17, the following injuries were found.
Page 12 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined
1) 2' to 3' burns found on head & neck including face hairs of eyebrows, eyelashes & front scalp hairs are burnt.
(2) 2' to 3' burns found on front of chest and abdomin excluding mid of chest 7 left lower abbdomin.
(3) 2' to 3' burns found on whole back of the body.
(4) 2' to 3' burns found on both upper limbs.
(5) 2' to 3' burns found on both lower limbs excluding feet.
Fowl smelling, yellowish-greenish coloured with frunk discharge of pus , sloughs are present at above described burnt areas with red inflammed bruises.
All the above mentioned injuries were antemortem in nature and the cause of death was shock as a result of burns and its complications.
During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he has not mentioned the total percentage of burns in the postmortem note produced at Exhibit 19. If a person with synthetic clothes is cooking and there is a burst in the stove, the injuries as sustained by the deceased would be accidental also. 10.4 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 5 Pir Mammad Hussainbhai Sheikh at Exhibit 20 and the witness is the brother of the deceased, who has fully supported the case of the prosecution.
During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that on the date of the incident, two persons came and told him that his sister was making tea at home and she Page 13 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined had sustained burn injuries and was admitted in the hospital. That his sister was earlier married and she had taken a divorce and at the time of marriage, they were residing at Jamalpur. That before marriage, his brother-in-law Iqbalbhai had taken a house near Bombay Hotel, which was at a distance of about ten to fifteen minutes from their place. 10.5 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 6 Abdul Hamid Abdul Samad Sheikh at Exhibit 21 and the witness is the grandfather of the deceased.
During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that when he reached the hospital, he had spoken to the deceased and he has spoken to deceased. 10.6 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 7 Harshadkumar Narmadashankar Upadhyay examined at Exhibit 25 is the Executive Magistrate, Metropolitan Area and Circle Officer, Vasna, who has recorded the dying declaration of the deceased, which is produced at Exhibit 26. The witness has stated that on 14th May 2006, he had gone into the burns ward and had recorded the dying declaration of the deceased and she had stated that the incident had occurred at Jamalpur Cross Road and she had set herself ablazed as the accused were harassing her and at the time of the incident, her husband, mother-in-law, sister-in- law, father-in-law and brother-in-law were outside. Page 14 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that in the police yadi, it was mentioned that the deceased was preparing tea in the morning and her clothes caught fire and she had sustained burn injuries. During the recording of the dying declaration, no specific questions as to the kind of harassment by the in- laws were asked to her.
10.7 The prosecution has examined Prosecution Witness No. 8 Dr. Kuldeepbhai Jayanthilal Joshi at Exhibit 29 and the witness is the Medical Officer, who was working as the CMO at V.S.Hospital on 14th May 2006, when Rehanaben Iqbalbhai was brought at the hospital at 8.25 am by Ismailbhai Sheikh for treatment. In the history, she had stated that she sustained burn injuries, while she was cooking and she was conscious and was admitted in the burns ward for treatment. That the witness had given the Varhdi to the Police Station and during the cross examination, the witness has stated that the history given by the patient was mentioned in the case papers and in the case of burns, the patient suffers unbearable pain and fortevin and pathadine injections are given, which cause sedation and because of the effect, delusions and illusions are possible. That scope of tutoring such type of patients exists after the injection. 10.8 Prosecution Witness No. 9 Bhanjibhai Dayabhai Sandish examined at Exhibit 31, is the Investigating Officer, who has partly investigated the Page 15 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined offense and has drawn the panchnama of the place of offence and has deposed in detail about the procedure that was undertaken by him, while the investigation was handed over to him.
During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that at the time of the incident he was working as a PSI at the Kankaria Police Chowki and the place where the deceased resided was a thickly populated area, where persons from the Muslim community and other communities resided. That he had not recorded the statements of any neighbors and, in the Vardhi, it was stated that the deceased was preparing tea at her home and she had sustained burn injuries from the primus stove.
10.9 Prosecution Witness No. 10 Vinaybhai Vanabhi Choudhury examined at Exhibit 39 is the Investigating Officer who has investigated the offense and has narrated in detail the procedure undertaken by him. The witness has also recorded the complaint of the deceased, which is produced at Exhibit 40. The witness has stated that in the panchnama of the place of offense produced at Exhibit 15. During the panchnama, an iron stove burner and parts of the primus stove including the cork and vicer and three matchsticks were seized.
During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he had received a message that a lady Page 16 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined named Rehana was burnt and was admitted in the hospital and he had gone to the place of incident and inquired from the neighbors and the house members and had seen the place of offense. That when he went to record the statement of Rehana, her relatives were present and he had record and he had only recorded the complaint.
11. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, the incident of burns has occurred on 14-05-2006 early in the morning and immediately after the incident, Rehana Iqbalbhai Sheikh was brought to the V.S. hospital for treatment, where, she was treated by Prosecution Witness No. 8 Dr. Kuldeep Jayanthilal Joshi. In the history before the Medical Officer, she has categorically stated that she sustained burn injuries, while she was cooking and she was brought to the hospital by the accused No. 1 her father-in-law.
During the cross examination of the medical officer, it has come on record that painkiller injections were given to the deceased, which caused sedation and the scope for delusions and illusions would also occur. In the evidence, it has also emerged that immediately, thereafter the mother, brother and grandfather of the deceased had come to the hospital and subsequently, in the complaint, her version has changed and she has stated that the accused were harassing her. It has also come on record that the deceased and her husband were residing separately from the accused Page 17 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined in the house near Bombay Hotel and in view of the contradictory evidences on record and the opinion of Prosecution Witness No. 4 Dr. Rohitkumar Chimanlal Jariwala that the injuries sustained by the deceased could be accidental and considering the panchnama of the place of offense produced at Exhibit 15, it is proved that the incident has accidentally occurred. The learned trial Court has discussed the entire oral and documentary evidence and has appreciated the same including the fact that immediately prior to the incident, the deceased and her husband had come to the house of her mother Prosecution Witness No. 3 Noorbibi Hussainbhai Sheikh and had happily left for home and there was no explanation as to why immediately two days after the immediately after two days she should commit suicide. There is no thing on record to suggest that the deceased was instigated or incided to commit suicide by the accused.
12. In view of the settled position of law in the decisions of Chandrappa (supra) and Mahendra Awase (Supra) 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 extending benefit of doubt and Page 18 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1595/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/02/2025 undefined acquitting the accused of the charges levelled against him. 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 agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of extending benefit of doubt and 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.
13. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 94 of 2007 on 29-02-2008, is hereby confirmed.
14. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) VVM Page 19 of 19 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue Mar 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 04 21:41:02 IST 2025