Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Patel Dharamshibhai Thakarshi Bhai on 14 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 639 of 1999
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
PATEL DHARAMSHIBHAI THAKARSHI BHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR L.B.DABHI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MS TEJAL A VASHI(2704) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 14/05/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT)
1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been filed by the State
under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
challenging the judgment and order dated 20.04.1999 passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar (hereinafter
referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Session Case No.108 of
1994. By way of the impugned judgment and order, the
accused have been acquitted of all the charges levelled
against them under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 read with 114
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as
“IPC“).
Page 1 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
2. The short facts of the prosecution case read as under:-
2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that Chandanben
(hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) was married to
Accused No. 1, Patel Dharamsinhbhai Thakarsinhbhai,
fourteen months prior to the incident that took place on 21st
July 1993, at approximately 9:00 p.m. On that day, the
deceased allegedly committed suicide at her matrimonial
home by consuming poisonous medicine. Accused Nos. 2 and
3 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased,
respectively.
2.2 The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by the
father of the deceased, alleging that the accused had
demanded a fridge and subjected her to cruelty, which
ultimately led to her suicide.
2.3 The Investigating Officer recorded witness statements,
prepared panchnamas including panchnama of scene of
offence etc. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet
came to be filed against accused. The Magistrate has
committed the case to be tried by Session Court – Trial Court.
2.4 Upon completion of the investigation and upon committal
of the case to the Trial Court, learned Trial Court, after
appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, has
found so many contradictions in the version of witnesses and
complainant, who have been examined by the prosecution and
the story enumerated by complainant as well as other
supporting witnesses, are not found trust worthy. Thus,
considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court,Page 2 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
has acquitted all the accused from all the charges.
3. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
Mr.L.B.Dabhi and learned advocate Mr. Neel Dave for
learned advocate Ms. Tejal A. Vashi for the accused No.1 –
respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Dipak R. Dave for
accused No.2 and 3 – respondent nos.2 and 3 at length, who
have taken us through various oral evidence as well as
documentary evidence, which are on record. We have
independently examined and appreciated evidence of
witnesses.
4. Learned Trial Judge, framed charges vide Exh.6 against the
Respondents – Accused for the aforesaid offences. The
Respondents – Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be
tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to
bring home the charge, the prosecution has also produced
the following oral and documentary evidence.
Oral Evidences of Prosecution
PW.No. Exh.No. Name and Particulars
1 20 Complianant,
2 46 Diptiben Sanatbhai Triveid
3 47 Amitaben Himatbhai Patel,
4 54 Panch- Prabhudas Shamjibhai
5 56 Dr.Dineshbhai Harjibhai Gohil
6 60 Raghavjibhai Jasmatbhai
7 64 PSI - Jovabhai Hathibhai Manjriya
8 71 Hemendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta
9 77 PSI - Arjunbhai Girdharilal Mistry
10 81 PSO - Ranchodbhai Narsihnbhai
Documentary Evidences
Sr.No. Exh-No. Document Particulars
1. 48 to 53 Letter and Invitation Card of marriage
2. 55 Panchnama of place of occurrence
3. 57 Post mortem report
Page 3 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
4. 58 Death certificate
5. 62 List of Kariyavar
6. 69 Complaint
7. 72 Inquest Panchnama
8. 84 Panchnama of Arrest
9. 86 Police Report forwarded to Civil Surgeon
10 90 FSL Report
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.B.Dabhi would
submit that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law and
evidence on record and the findings recorded by the Trial
Court are erroneous and based on irrelevant material.
5.1 He would further submit that learned Trial Court has
committed an error in acquitting the respondents – accused
and has not properly appreciated the evidence produced on
record, though the prosecution had proved its case against
the accused and learned Trial Court has given undue
weightage to the minor omission and contradiction in the
version of witnesses though there was no any material
omission and contradiction in the evidence of the witnesses.
5.2 Learned APP would further submit that the Trial Court
failed to appreciate the fact that the duration of the
deceased’s marriage was barely fourteen months. Due to the
constant demand for dowry and the cruelty she endured, she
was compelled to commit suicide.
5.3 Learned APP would further submit that the Trial Court
failed to draw any legal presumption in favor of the
prosecution regarding the abetment of the deceased’s suicide
as well as the dowry death. In doing so, the Trial Court
completely overlooked Sections 113A and 113B of the
Evidence Act.
Page 4 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
5.4 Learned APP would further submit that the family
members of deceased, who has been examined, have
confirmed one fact that there was a demand of dowry by
accused no.1 It was further stated that the deceased faced
constant cruelty, and despite being an educated woman, she
tragically died by suicide by consuming poisonous medicine.
It is highly improbable for a woman to take such an extreme
step within just 14 months of marriage without significant
underlying reasons.
5.5 Thus, the reasons assigned by the learned Trial Court
while acquitting the accused are unjust, improper, perverse
and unwarranted to the facts of the prosecution case and
thereby, has committed an error in acquitting the accused. It
is further submitted that the prosecution has established the
guilt of all the accused and learned Trial Court has
committed an error both on law and facts.
5.6 Thus, the learned Trial Court has wrongly recorded the
order of acquittal, which deserves to be quashed and
appropriate sentences for the offences be passed against all
the accused and he urged this Court to allow the captioned
appeal.
6. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Neel Dave, appearing for
the accused, has vehemently opposed the appeal, contending,
inter alia, that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove
the charges leveled against the accused.
6.1 Learned advocate Mr. Dave would submit that the
prosecution has failed to establish the charges, as each
prosecution witness presented a different account regarding
the cruelty, and due to this inconsistency, the charges under
Page 5 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
Section 498-A of the IPC were not proven. He would further
submit that since it was not proved on record that the
deceased was subjected to cruelty, no presumption of
abetment of suicide could have been drawn by the Trial
Court, nor could any presumption of dowry death be inferred.
6.2 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that
there are various contradictions in the statements of the
complainant as well as the deceased’s sister, Diptiben, which
create reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s case. Having
failed to establish their case beyond a reasonable doubt, the
Trial Court has correctly acquitted the accused of all charges.
6.3 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that
there is no other independent witness to support the
prosecution’s case. The only witness examined by the
prosecution, Himendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta, a friend of
Accused No. 1, did not testify to any resentment between the
deceased and Accused No.1.
6.4 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that so
far as oral evidence of complainant – father of deceased,
sisters of deceased – Diptiben and Amitaben as well as
deceased’s Uncle – Raghavjibhai, they all are relative of
deceased.
6.5 Learned advocate Mr.Dave would further submit that
Accused No.1 had given additional statement and examined
himself wherein he has categorically deposed that after
marriage, accused residing with deceased at Bhavnagar but
due to ill health of his father, he was used to look after the
Page 6 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
shop situated at Sihor, thereby, accused no.1 having told the
deceased to shift at his native in the village, deceased was
not like to move in the village which was a factor weight with
deceased to commit an act of suicide. So, he would submit
that none of the accused have played any active role and
deceased was not subjected to cruelty soon before her death
and/ or demanded any dowry, whereby, ingredients of
Section 498-A, 304-B and 306 were not made out by
prosecution.
\
6.6 He would further submit that in a case of acquittal, there
would be a total presumption of innocence in favour of
accused and as per such legal position of law and criteria laid
down by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while deciding
appeal against order of acquittal, this Court may not disturb
the order of acquittal. Thus, the learned Trial Court has
correctly acquitted the accused so he has requested this
Court not to interfere with the impugned judgment and order
of acquittal.
7. Before dealing with merit of the appeal, at this stage, we
would first like to remind ourselves the position of law
propounded by Supreme Court of India in its various
decisions, whereby it has laid down several criteria while
deciding acquittal appeal.
8. It would be apt to refer and rely upon the decision of the
Supreme Court of India in a case of Babu Sahebagouda
Rudragoudar and Others vs. State of Karnataka [(2024)
8 SCC 149] has held as under:
“39. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasadv. State of
Bihar and Another, (2022) 3 SCC 471 encapsulated thePage 7 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
legal position covering the field after considering
variousearlier 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
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
Page 8 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
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 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; and8.5. 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 material41.3 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.”
Page 9 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
9. Now, keeping in mind the aforesaid ratio, we have gone
through the impugned judgment and re-appreciated entire
sets of evidence so as to confirm whether the accused could
have been held guilty for commission of crime under Section
498-A, 304-B, 306 read with Section 114 of of I.P.C?.
Nonetheless, we could not find any infirmity either in findings
so recorded by Trial Court and its ultimate conclusion by
which accused has been acquitted from all the charges due to
following reasons:-
10. The Trial Court has considered the oral as well as
documentary evidence, whereby, each and every relevant
witness and the evidence have been discussed in detail. The
learned Trial Court has considered the aspect with regards to
contradictions in the evidence of prosecution so observed in
para 13 and 14 of the impugned judgment, whereby, arrived
at a conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove the
incident so narrated by them so, gave benefit of doubt to
accused.
11. Even after re-appreciating oral and documentary evidence by
this Court, we are unable to reach a conclusion that Trial
Court had committed any error while acquitting accused.
11.1 The fact remains that the deceased was an educated
woman, working at the time of the unfortunate event, during
which she committed suicide while staying in the city of
Bhavnagar. However, according to the further
statement/evidence of Accused No. 1, due to family
circumstances, the deceased was told by her husband to move
to his native village Surka, , as Accused No. 1 was required to
look after his family shop selling pesticides in Sihor, District
Page 10 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
Bhavnagar. This situation caused resentment between the
couple.
11.2 It further comes from the evidence that on the day of the
incident, due to the aforementioned circumstances, Accused
No. 1 did not drop the deceased off at her place of work.
Instead, Accused No. 2, her brother-in-law, took her to drop at
her office. It is possible that the deceased might have felt that,
if she were to move to Accused No. 1’s village, she would have
to leave her job, despite being a qualified woman. The Trial
Court considered this would be one of the reasons for her
committing suicide, which cannot be regarded as a perverse
finding, especially in light of the overall facts and
circumstances of the present case.
11.3 It has come on record that each family member of the
deceased had their own version of the cruelty allegedly
inflicted on the deceased by the accused, which weakens the
case of the prosecution regarding the charges of cruelty under
Section 498-A of the IPC. The Trial Court correctly observed
that contradictions emerged during the cross-examination of
the complainant being father, her sisters, and her uncle,
leading to the conclusion that the charges under Section 498-
A was not proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable
doubt. Even otherwise, no specific allegation of cruelty by
accused on her came out of their evidence which would lead
to believe that case of cruelty was not proved beyond doubt.
11.4 Further, while re-appreciating the evidence of the
deceased’s sisters, namely Diptiben and Amritaben – PW-2, it
is observed that both have provided different versions of the
events of cruelty and demand of dowary. As such, no specific
Page 11 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
allegation of cruelty has emerged from their evidence that
would hold the accused guilty of the offence of cruelty.
Moreover, they did not inform their father that the deceased
had ever told them about any demand for dowry by the
accused. In their police statements, they have not mentioned
any such fact regarding the demand of dowry by accused Nos.
2 and 3.
11.5 It has also come on record that Diptiben deposed certain
facts in her evidence which were not recorded in her police
statement. The Trial Court correctly observed that her
evidence suggested that her statement was recorded only
after a delay of five to six days from the registration of the
FIR, likely to facilitate the arrest of the accused. She was
unable to elaborate on the details of the alleged cruelty, and
other than a mention of a demand for a fridge, she could not
demonstrate how the deceased was subjected to cruelty. It
was also surprising that, until the deceased’s death, any
allegations of cruelty or dowry demands were never revealed
to her parents. Therefore, Diptiben’s conduct came under
cloud, and the Trial Court rightly disbelieved her testimony.
11.6 So far as the oral evidence of another sister of the
deceased, namely Amritaben – PW-3 is concerned, her police
statement was recorded about one month after the complaint
was filed, as she was called from her in-laws’ place in Surat. It
has come on record that she never shared any details of the
cruelty or dowry demands, either with her father or her
husband, until her statement was recorded. Some of the facts
stated by her were contradicted by the oral evidence of
Hemendrabhai Champakbhai Mehta, a friend of accused No.
Page 12 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
1, who presented photographs showing that he, along with his
family and the deceased, had gone on an outing together.
11.7 The uncle of the deceased, namely Ragavjibhai PW-6, who
was residing in Bhavnagar, was examined by the prosecution,
but his evidence did not further support the case of the
prosecution. According to his testimony, on the day of kite
flying, i.e., 14th January 1993, the deceased visited his
residence and spoke about the cruelty and dowry demands by
the accused to his wife. However, he also mentioned that she
had previously visited with her husband but never disclosed
any such cruelty or dowry demands. It has come on record
that on the day of the kite flying event, the deceased was at
her job and did not visit her uncle’s residence. As a result, the
Trial Court did not believe the uncle’s testimony. It is difficult
to believe that Ragavjibhai, residing in Bhavnagar where the
deceased also lived with her husband, was never informed by
her about the ongoing cruelty or dowry demands, as alleged
by the complainant and his family members.
11.8 The overall assessment of the evidence suggests that the
deceased was not subjected to cruelty immediately prior to
her death by the accused. Instead, it appears that she might
have committed suicide for reasons unrelated to alleged
cruelty and or the accused, which the prosecution
unfortunately failed to establish. Further statement of accused
No. 1 indicate that the deceased was an educated woman who
was unwilling to stay in the village and did not want to leave
her job, which could have been one of the factors contributing
to her suicide. Such a possibility cannot be ruled out, given
the shaky evidence presented during the trial.
Page 13 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/639/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
12. Once, prosecution failed to establish the charge of Section
498-A i.e., Cruelty inflicted by accused upon deceased soon
before her death, no legal presumption either under Section
113-A and 113-B of Evidence Act can be drawn in favour of
prosecution. According to us, prosecution has egregiously
failed to prove charges against accused.
13. Thus, after overall assessment of evidence and its re-
appreciation as well as reasons assigned by learned Trial
Court, we are in complete agreement with view taken by the
Trial Court having acquitted the accused by giving benefit of
doubt.
14. Considering these set of evidences on record and in light of
the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as
reproduced hereinabove, which deals with the law on
acquittal, we are of the opinion that no error has been
committed by the Trial Court, Bhavnagar, in Sessions Case
No.108 of 1994 while acquitting the respondents.
15. The appeal is 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, if called for, be sent back to the concerned Trial
Court forthwith.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
MOHD MONIS
Page 14 of 14
Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Mon May 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon May 19 22:43:29 IST 2025
[ad_1]
Source link