The present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant - original complainant, State of Gujarat under Section 378 Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 6.12.1993 rendered by the learned 5th Extra Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.33 of 1993. The said case was registered against the present respondent original accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to the prosecution case, the complainant Jivanbhai Nathabhai Parmar got his daughter, Niruben married with Mahendrabhai Lallubhai Parmar, resident of Dumada, prior to four years of incident. The Lallubhai Parmar, father-in-law of deceased was abusing and physically harassing the deceased. The deceased was residing with her husband in the same house so the accused was insisting them to vacate the house. On 2.5.1992 between 7.30 to 8.00 O'clock the accused meted out mental and physical harassment to the deceased and compelled her to commit suicide. This cruelty was meted out by the respondent - accused as father-in-law of the deceased. Therefore, deceased poured kerosene on herself and ablaze and expired due to burns injuries. Hence the complaint came to be lodged.
Thereafter, investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, accused person was arrested and, ultimately, charge-sheet came to be filed against him in the Court of learned Magistrate. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed to the Court of Sessions.
Thereafter, charge came to be framed and explained to the accused person, to which the accused person pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
In order to bring home the charges against the accused person, prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.
Thereafter, after filing closing pursis by the prosecution, further statements of accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded. The accused person has denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against him.
At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondent - accused.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 6.12.1993 rendered by the learned 5th Extra Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.33 of 1993, the appellant -
State has preferred the present appeal before this Court.
Heard Learned APP Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, appearing on behalf of the appellant - State. She has contended that the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge is contrary to law and evidence on record. She has contended that the learned Judge has not properly appreciated oral as well as documentary evidence adduced by the parties in its proper perspectives.
She has contended that the learned Judge has erred in discarding the evidence of complainant Jivanbhai Nathabhai whose evidence gets corroboration from the FIR which was lodged immediately after the incident. The complainant has deposed that accused, father-in-law was harassing and abusing the deceased.
She has contended that there is evidence that accused had quarreled with the deceased day before the date of incident. The prosecution witness - Chhitabhai has also deposed regarding harassment and ill-treatment meted out by the accused to the deceased. The prosecution witness Pravinbhai has also supported the case of the prosecution regarding mental torture and ill-treatment given by the accused to the deceased.
She has contended that the panchnama of the place of incident shows that cap of stove was opened and kerosene was spread on the floor. The deceased did not come out from the room and cried but no one came to her help which clearly shows that there is a case of abetment to commit suicide.
She has further contended that through oral evidence of this witness prosecution has proved contents of Ex.7. She has read contents of panchnama of place Ex.10 and contended that so far as recovery of muddamal is concerned, it is proved beyond reasonable doubt. She has read Ex.12 and Ex.14 and contended that the prosecution has prima-facie proved that the respondent - accused was always abusing the deceased. She has further contended that as per provisions of Section 8 of the Evidence Act conduct of the respondent - accused is proved as abettor, provocator and instigator to the deceased. Lastly, she has read observations of the learned Judge and contended that observations made by the learned Judge are not proper in the eye of law and therefore, judgment and order of the learned Judge is required to be set aside.
Notice is served to the other side. No one is present on behalf of the respondent - accused.
Heard learned advocate for the appellant. I have gone through the papers produced in the case. As per case of the prosecution respondent is father-in-law of the deceased and as per allegation due to provocation and abetment of the respondent the deceased committed suicide. The material witness examined by the prosecution is Investigating Officer Mr.N.M.Chauhan Ex.14 and prior to registration of the complaint Inquiry Case No.11 of 1992 was registered. The complainant is examined at Ex.6 and brother of complainant is examined at Ex.12 and they have tried to prove that respondent - accused abused the deceased and he was doubting about her character and in the result of quarrel she committed suicide. But as per evidence of the witnesses they have not disclosed that respondent poured kerosene and abetted to commit suicide. Looking to the two sets of story of the prosecution case the learned Judge has acquitted the respondent giving benefit of doubt.
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 re-appreciate 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."
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.
It is settled legal position that in an acquittal Appeal, the Appellate Court is not required to re-write 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 respondent - 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.
In the result, the Appeal is hereby dismissed. The impugned Judgment and order dated 6.12.1993 rendered by the learned 5th Extra Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.33 of 1993, acquitting the respondent - accused, is hereby confirmed. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the trial Court concerned, forthwith.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) kks Top