1. The present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant – original complainant, State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Cr.
P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 3.1.1994 rendered in Sessions Case No.162 of 1991 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar. The said case was registered against the present respondents original accused for the offence under Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. According to the prosecution case, on 7.2.1991 Bhavna, daughter of the complainant was got married with Koli Jitendrakumar living at Darbargadh, Palitana. On 13.6.1991, the complainant was performing duty at Gariyadhar under the instructions of Police SubInspector at Polling Booth, Village : Shivendranagar. On 15.6.1991, the complainant was performing his duty, at that time, at 2:00 o'clock in noon Constable of Palitana came with petrolling Jeep and informed the complainant that your daughter, Bhavna is burnt and Circle Police Inspector of Palitana is calling you. The complainant came to Palitana in Jeep with Constable. In the Police Station of Palitana he was informed that your daughter Bhavna has burnt and she was taken to Bhavnagar so the complainant went to the Government Hospital at Bhavnagar where wife of the complainant and other family members living in Bhavnagar were present. They informed the complainant that Bhavna has died and postmortem is performed and dead body is given to the inlaws of his daughter. On 15.6.1991, after completion of funeral ceremony the complainant heard ladies were talking that Bhavna is burnt so he was confirmed that his daughter is burnt and hence he filed the complaint.
3. Thereafter, investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested and, ultimately, chargesheet came to be filed against them in the Court of learned Magistrate.
4. Thereafter, charge came to be framed and explained to the accused persons, to which the accused persons not pleaded guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In order to bring home the charges against the accused persons, prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.
6. Thereafter, after filing closing pursis by the prosecution, further statements of accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. The accused persons have denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against them.
7. At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondents – accused.
8. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 3.1.1994 rendered in Sessions Case No.162 of 1991 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, the appellant – State has preferred the present appeal before this Court.
4. Heard Learned APP Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, appearing on behalf of the appellant – State. She has read charge Ex.4 and contended that the respondents are brotherinlaw (Jeth) and sisterinlaw (Jethani) of the deceased. In the result of abetment, instigation and provocation the deceased Bhavnar committed suicide. She has further contended that as per ingredients of Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and from the evidence of complainant, his wife and daughter prosecution has proved case beyond reasonable doubt. Lastly she has contended that the learned Judge has wrongly considered defence version of the respondents. She has prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and order passed by the trial Court.
5. Heard Mr.J.D.Ajmera, learned advocate for the respondents. He has contended that so far as evidence of the prosecution witnesses are concerned, prosecution has examined complainant, his wife and daughter. He has contended that except these three witnesses other witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. He has read oral version of the complainant and contended that when direct evidence is not produced on record by the prosecution in connection of the alleged offence then hearsay evidence is the weakest evidence. He has contended that prosecution has failed to produce on record corroborative evidence to prove the case. Lastly he has contended that order of acquittal passed by the learned Judge requires to be accepted. He has prayed to dismiss the Appeal.
6. Heard learned advocates for both the parties. I have gone through the papers produced on record. From the oral evidence of the complainant it primafacie appears that he has admitted before the learned Judge that he has no personal knowledge regarding the said offence but from the talk of the lady members of the society he came to the conclusion that both the respondents have committed alleged offence. From the oral evidence of the wife, complainant and daughter there is nothing on record to show that they have any knowledge regarding cruelty, instigation, provocation or abetment to lead the deceased to commit suicide. It primafacie appears that main ingredients of Section 498(A) and 306 of the Indian Penal Code are not attracted.
7. In a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Goa V. Sanjay Thakran & Anr. Reported in (2007)3 SCC 75, the Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases. In para 16 of the said decision the Court has observed as under:
“16. From the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that while exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal the Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by any reasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be characterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the Court of appeal would not take the view which would upset the judgment delivered by the Court below. However, the appellate court has a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the conclusion arrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court has committed a manifest error of law and ignored the material evidence on record. A duty is cast upon the appellate court, in such circumstances, to reappreciate the evidence to arrive to a just decision on the basis of material placed on record to find out whether any of the accused is connected with the commission of the crime he is charged with.”
8. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh & Ors, reported in 2007 AIR SCW 5553 and in Girja Prasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. state of MP, reported in 2007 AIR SCW 5589. Thus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal are well settled.
9. It is settled legal position that in an acquittal Appeal, the Appellate Court is not required to rewrite the Judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the Appellate Court is in agreement with the reasons assigned by the trial Court acquitting the accused. In the instant case, this Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and findings recorded by the trial Court while acquitting the respondents – accused and adopting the said reasons as well as the reasons aforesaid, in my view, the impugned Judgment is just, legal and proper and requires no interference by this Court at this stage. Hence, this Appeal requires to be dismissed.
10. In the result, the Appeal is hereby dismissed. The impugned Judgment and order dated 3.1.1994 rendered in Sessions Case No.162 of 1991 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, acquitting the respondents – accused, is hereby confirmed. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the trial Court concerned, forthwith.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) kks