1. Though served, no one is appeared on behalf of the respondent.
2. The present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 27.4.1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad at Navsari, in Sessions Case No.142 of 1991, whereby the accused have been acquitted from the charges leveled against them. By an order dated 26.2.1996, the Appeal is dismissed against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the appeal is admitted qua respondent No.1.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased Sundarben was married with accused No.1 and the accused No.2 and 3 are father inlaw and motherinlaw of the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons caused mental and physical cruelty on the deceased and the accused had beaten the deceased. Even the deceased was compelled by the accused to eat fish and meat. Therefore, the deceased on account of harassment of the accused, jumped into the well and died. Therefore, the offence under Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. Thereafter, necessary investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, respondents were arrested and, ultimately, chargesheet was filed against them before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court, which was numbered as Sessions Case No.142 of 1991. The trial was initiated against the respondents accused.
4. To prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has examined, in all 9 witnesses and also produced several documentary evidence.
5. At the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent of all the charges leveled against him by judgment and order dated 27.4.1995.
6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the Sessions Court, the appellant State has preferred the present appeal.
7. It is submitted by learned APP that the judgment and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondents. Learned APP has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence. She submitted that the accused committed the offence, which is against the woman and from the evidence of the witnesses, it appears that the accused caused harassment to the deceased. She read the charge at Exhibit 1 and submitted that the deceased along with her son committed suicide and died, therefore, from the charge, it is established that due to harassment on the part of the accused, the deceased with her son died. She submitted that in the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused persons had not denied forcefully about their abetment in the commission of the suicide by the deceased. She read evidence of P.W.1, and submitted that in the evidence of this witness, the reason of death is shown is throttling. She also read the evidence of P.W.3 – Parbhubhai Zinabhai at Exhibit 29 and submitted that from the evidence of this witness, it is reflected that the deceased was harassed by the accused. This witness stated in his evidence that in his community, there is a custom to give Buffalo or cow at the time of marriage, to the soninlaw and this witness, who is father of the deceased was not in a position to give the same, therefore, accused persons gave taunt to the deceased with a view to harass the deceased. She further submitted that from the evidence of P.W.4, Ratilal Parbhubhai, it appears that the accused persons compelled the deceased to eat the meat and fish, which was disliked by the deceased. She further submitted that from the evidence of P.W.5 – Premiben, it appears that the accused persons gave mental and physical harassment to the deceased. She further submitted that the ingredients of offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 323 and 114 are very well attracted to the case of the accused. As per her submission, the learned trial Judge without appreciating the evidence on record, wrongly acquitted the accused person and therefore, the judgment and order passed by the learned trial Judge is required to be quashed and set aside by allowing the present Appeal and the order of conviction to the accused may be passed.
8. I have perused the record and considered the submissions made by the parties. I have perused the oral evidence of the witnesses examined by the trial Court. I have minutely perused the evidence of Dr. Manoharbhai and from the evidence, it appears that this witness has not supported the case of the prosecution. From the evidence of complainant, it appears that the story narrated in the evidence, is not believable and the say of the witness, on the issue of eating meat and fish, the accused got excited and therefore, deceased committed suicide, is not correct and trustworthy. Even from the evidence of Doctor, it appears that the reason of death is throttling, but from the P.M. Note, it does not appear that there is mark of nail and finger on the neck while throttling the deceased. I have minutely perused the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and therefore, it can be said that the prosecution is absolutely failed to prove the case against the accused, that due to instigation or provocation, the deceased died by committing suicide. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 498(A), 306 and 114 are not established against the accused persons. I have perused the provisions of Section 107 and 108 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the offence alleged against the accused persons is not proved and therefore, learned Sessions Judge has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and rightly acquitted the accused.
9. I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court. I have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led before the trial court and also considered the submissions made by learned APP for the appellantState. Thus, from the evidence itself, it is established that the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
10. Learned APP is not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view of the matter or that the approach of the trial court is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the trial court has ignored the material evidence on record.
11. In the above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the trial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent of the charges leveled against her.
12. I find that the findings recorded by the trial court are absolutely just and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by it.
13. I am, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence the appeal is hereby dismissed. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. Record and proceedings to be sent back to trial Court, forthwith.
(Z.K. SAIYED, J.) ynvyas