The present Appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is filed by the appellant - State of Gujarat against the Judgment and order dated 18.11.1995 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Sessions Case No. 230 of 1994, whereby the learned Judge has acquitted the respondents - original accused from the charges alleged against them. Against the said Judgment, the appellant - State has filed present Appeal against respondents - original accused.
The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the marriage of Lilaben, daughter of the complainant, was solemnized with the respondent No.2 - original accused No.2. The respondent No.1 - original accused No.1 is the mother in law and respondent No.3 - original accused No.3 is the father in law of deceased Lilaben. It is alleged that after the marriage, all the above accused were giving physical and mental torture to the deceased on the suspicion that the deceased had illicit relation with one person and because of mental and physical torture, Lilaben had committed suicide on 9.6.1994 and due to burns injury she had expired. Thereafter, on 13.6.1994, the complainant filed complaint before Mahemdabad Police Station against the accused. The complaint was registered vide CR No. I - 136 of 1994. The offences under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Sections 114 of I.P. Code was registered against the respondents - original accused.
Necessary investigation was carried out, statements of the witnesses were recorded. Thereafter, after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the respondents - accused in the Court of learned Magistrate. Thereafter, as the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, the charge was framed against the respondents - accused. The respondents - accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.
To prove the case against the accused, the prosecution has examined the witnesses and relied upon the documents. At the end of trial, after recording the statements of the respondents - accused, under Section 313 Cr. P.C., and after hearing the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the defence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide the impugned Judgment and order, has acquitted the respondents - accused from the charges levelled against them.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid Judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred this Appeal.
Heard learned A.P.P. Ms. Hansa Punani, appearing on behalf of the appellant - State of Gujarat. Respondents are duly served and Board shows that on behalf of the respondents, learned Advocate Mr. B.S. Supehia is appearing, but, he did not remain present at the time of hearing. I have also gone through the Judgment and order passed by the trial Court and also considered the documents produced on the record of the case.
Learned APP, appearing on behalf of the appellant, has contended that the Judgment and order passed by the learned Judge is without considering the facts and evidence on the record. She has contended that looking to the complaint and the deposition of the witnesses it clearly appears that due to the harassment by the husband and in-laws, the deceased was compelled to commit Suicide. She has also contended that, prima-facie, it appears that as the in-laws of the deceased was doubting her character and, therefore, they were giving physical and mental torture and because of that the deceased herself had burnt and committed suicide. She has contended that looking to the facts and the evidence on the record, prima-facie, the prosecution has proved the instigation, provocation and the abatement on the part of the accused. She has, therefore, contended that looking to the over all evidence, prima-facie, the prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt and the learned Judge has wrongly acquitted the accused from the charges levelled against him. She, therefore, contended that the Judgment and order of the trial Court is bad in law and perverse and, therefore, the same requires to be quashed and set aside.
Other side is served and on their behalf, learned Advocate Mr. Supehia, is appearing, but, he has remained absent. I have gone through the papers produced before me as also the Judgment of the Court below. I have also considered the oral as well as documentary produced on record.
From the deposition of witnesses, it appears that the witnesses are related to each other and that there are material contradictions in their evidence. The main allegations of the witnesses that the accused were doubting the character of the deceased and, therefore, they were harassing the deceased by giving mental as well as physical torture. The complainant has stated in her evidence that the mother in law of deceased was harassing her on account of house-hold work and the father-in-law of deceased was in habit of taking liquor and, therefore, in a drunken condition he was harassing the deceased. However, in her examination in chief the complainant has not stated that the deceased was harassed by the accused as they were doubting about the character of the deceased. It is also alleged by the complainant that the accused have put the stick on the neck of the deceased and thereafter on giving pressure she has dead. However, there was no mention in the Post Mortem Report as also in the Inquest Panchnama (Exh.21) about the injury on the neck. The complainant has stated in her cross-examination that before her the deceased made complaint against her in-laws and she want to reside separately from them, but, her husband does not agree to reside separately. The prosecution has also examined the witnesses who are related to each other. From the evidence of all the witnesses, it clearly appears that there are material contradictions in their evidence. The learned Judge has clearly observed that from the evidence of Medical Officers and other witnesses, examined by the prosecution, it is not clearly established that whether the deceased was subjected the mental and physical cruelty by the accused. I have also gone through the main ingredients of Section 498-A I.P.Code, which reads as under :
"498-A
- Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty - whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine -
[Explanation
- For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means
-
(a) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman, or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand] Cruelty must prove through direct evidence of witnesses. Here, in the present case, from the oral evidence of witnesses, the prosecution could not be able to prove that due to the conduct and harassment by the accused the deceased has committed suicide. In the present case, learned Judge has categorically observed that the prosecution has not produced any evidence to show that any mental or physical torture was given to the deceased by her husband and other family members. Therefore, it appears that the accused have been falsely involved in the case. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the learned Judge has not committed any error in not believing the case of prosecution. In my opinion, therefore, the Judgment of the trial Court is proper and no interference is called for.
It is settled legal position that in 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 respondents - accused and adopting the said reasons and for 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 view of above, the Appeal is dismissed. The Judgment and order dated 18.11.1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Sessions Case No. 230 of 1994 is hereby confirmed. Bail Bonds, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record & Proceeding to be sent back to the trial Court immediately.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) sas Top