Gujarat High Court
Vishvanath Ramshanker Chaturvedi vs Ramkrishna Chandrashekhar Tripathi on 21 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 998 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
================================================================
VISHVANATH RAMSHANKER CHATURVEDI
Versus
RAMKRISHNA CHANDRASHEKHAR TRIPATHI & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS SANDHYA D NATANI(3678) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR IM PANDYA(546) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
MS JIRGA JHAVERI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 7
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 21/07/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Today, Mr. I.M. Pandya, learned counsel for respondent
Nos. 1 to 6, submits that respondent No. 1 has passed away.
He has also produced on record the death certificate of
respondent No. 1, namely, Ramkrishna Chandrashekhar
Tripathi, issued by the competent authority, which records the
date of death as 28.10.2025. The same is taken on record.
2. In view of the above, present appeal stand disposed of
qua resp. No.1 as abated.
Page 1 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
3. The appellant-original complainant has preferred this
appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 against the judgment and order dated 18.12.2012
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil
and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (hereinafter be referred to as
“the Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 171 of 2009 whereby
the Trial Court has acquitted the respondents accused from
the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 and 114 of
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter be referred to as the “IPC“)
r/w the provision of Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition
Act. It is required to be noted herein that the State has not
preferred any appeal against the order of acquittal.
4. The facts giving rise to present appeal are that the
complainant, Vishwanath Ramshankar Chaturvedi, residing at
Shahibaug Police Headquarters, Block No. 14/242,
Ahmedabad, lodged a complaint on 28.02.2005, stating that
his daughter Sushilaben, aged about 32 years, had married
Dipak Ramkrishna Tripathi about fifteen years earlier
according to the customs of their community. After the
marriage, she resided at her matrimonial home in Choksi
Chali, Amraiwadi, along with her husband, mother-in-law,
father-in-law, brothers-in-law and sister-in-law. Out of the said
wedlock, she had two sons, namely Abhishek alias Raja, aged
about 9 years, and Ashish, aged about 4½ years.
4.1 Sushilaben was residing in a joint family where she was
subjected to physical and mental cruelty by her mother-in-law,
father-in-law, brothers-in-law, sister-in-law and brother-in-law
(husband of the sister-in-law), who taunted her on the grounds
Page 2 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
that she did not properly maintain the household, did not
wash clothes properly, and that insufficient dowry had been
brought from her parental home. Although her husband did
not object to the conduct of the other family members, he
used to console and persuade her. Sushilaben disclosed these
incidents whenever she visited her parental home. As the
harassment continued, about six months prior to the incident,
her husband shifted with her and their two children to a
separate rented house at Amraiwadi.
4.2 About one month prior to the incident, when Sushilaben
came to her parental home to deliver the wedding invitation of
her brother-in-law, she informed them that although she was
residing separately, her mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister-in-
law, both brothers-in-law and brother-in-law (Nanandoi)
frequently visited her house, pressurised her to bring money
from her parental home for purchasing a house, and subjected
her to mental harassment. The complainant counselled her
and sent her back to her matrimonial home. During the
previous Diwali, the complainant had given Rs.10,000/- for
purchasing a refrigerator. However, except for her husband,
the other accused persons continued to demand more money
from her, due to which she remained under mental stress.
4.3 On 13.02.2005, at about 12:00 noon, his son-in-law
Omprakash came to his house and informed him that
Sushilaben was seriously ill. Accordingly, the complainant’s
wife Rajeshri accompanied him, and thereafter the
complainant and his son also went to Sushilaben’s residence.
On reaching there, they found Sushilaben hanging from a
Page 3 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
hook attached to the ceiling by a noose and she had already
died. The police arrived at the spot and sent the dead body for
post-mortem examination. Thereafter, the complainant
remained occupied with her funeral and last rites.
4.4 Thereafter, the present complaint was lodged against the
accused persons at Amraiwadi Police Station, Ahmedabad, on
the basis of the aforesaid allegations, where FIR No. I-
139/2005 came to be registered for the above mentioned
offences.
4.5 Upon registration of the FIR, the police carried out the
investigation. Initially, the Investigating Officer registered
Accidental Death Case No. 20/2005, prepared the scene of
offence panchnama, inquest panchnama over the dead body,
and arranged for post-mortem examination. The Forensic
Science Officer was called to inspect the scene and prepare
the necessary report. The post-mortem report was collected,
the clothes of the deceased were seized under panchnama,
and the muddamal articles were forwarded to the Forensic
Science Laboratory for examination. The FSL report, upon
receipt, was taken on record. Statements of the relevant
witnesses were recorded.
4.6 Upon completion of the investigation, sufficient evidence
having been found against the accused, a charge-sheet was
submitted before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court
No. 7, Ahmedabad. Since the offences were exclusively triable
by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed
the case to the City Civil and Sessions Court under Section
209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where the present
Page 4 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
Sessions Case came to be tried.
4.7 Thereafter, on 20.08.2010, the learned Trial Court framed
charge (Exh. 5) against the accused for the above mentioned
offences. Their pleas were recorded at Exhibits 6 to 11,
wherein they denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty, and
claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the Sessions Case proceeded
to trial.
4.8 In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 11
witnesses and produced 10 documentary evidence. Per contra
the defence has also examined one witness namely Rambabu
Sudamaprasaid Chaturvedi.
4.9 Upon appreciation of the evidence, the learned Trial Court
by judgment and order dated 18.12.2012 passed in Sessions
Case No.171 of 2009, acquitted the respondents-accused for
the above mentioned offences.
4.10 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and
order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court the original
complainant has preferred present appeal.
5. Heard Ms. Sandhya D. Nathani, learned counsel for the
appellant, Mr. I.M. Pandya, learned counsel for the
respondents accused and Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP for
the respondent No.7 State of Gujarat.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
judgment and order of acquittal is bad in law and against the
weight of evidence. The impugned judgment is contrary to the
evidence on record and the settled principles of law and,
Page 5 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
therefore, deserves to be set aside.
6.1 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
learned Trial Court has erred in applying legal principles
which are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the
present case. She has submitted that the learned Trial Court
has materially erred in not appreciating the evidence that the
respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had demanded dowry and, pursuant to
such demand, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was paid for the
purchase of a refrigerator. The learned Trial Court further
erred in holding that the said amount was demanded by the
deceased herself out of her own free will.
6.2 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
the learned Trial Court failed to properly appreciate the
evidence of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses.
It further erred in holding that the accused were not residing
with the deceased at the time of the incident. The accused
being the in-laws of the deceased, their interference,
harassment, and cruelty continued even after the deceased
started residing separately from the joint family.
6.3 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
the learned Trial Court erred in holding that there were
material contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses and the complainant. It further erred in observing
that, during the accidental death inquiry, the witnesses had
not disclosed any harassment to the deceased. Such finding is
erroneous, as the cause of death was hanging resulting in
asphyxia, and the death could not have been treated as
Page 6 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
accidental. She has submitted that the deceased was driven to
commit suicide due to continuous mental and physical cruelty.
6.4 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
learned Trial Court further erred in holding that, in the
absence of documentary evidence regarding mental and
physical cruelty, no such cruelty was established. The said
finding is erroneous because, in cases involving matrimonial
cruelty, mental and physical harassment generally takes place
within the privacy of the matrimonial home, where
independent or documentary evidence is rarely available.
6.5 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
learned Trial Court erred in observing that, since the
deceased had informed her brother over the telephone a day
prior to the incident that she was under stress, it was his duty
to visit her and inquire about the reason for such stress. This
finding is wholly unsustainable. The deceased took the
extreme step of suicide on the very next day, which could not
reasonably have been anticipated by her brother. Therefore,
the learned Trial Court erred in concluding that, because her
brother did not immediately visit her, the suicide was without
any basis and was solely on account of her personal
depression.
6.6 Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
learned Trial Court also erred in observing that, since the
dead body of the deceased was handed over to her brother
after the post-mortem and was thereafter entrusted to her in-
laws for performing the last rites, it could not be accepted
Page 7 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
that the deceased had committed suicide due to the cruelty
inflicted upon her. This finding is misconceived and contrary
to the evidence on record. The complainant’s niece was
married into the same family, and the two minor children of
the deceased were residing with the accused. Owing to such
family circumstances and pressure, the complainant’s family
was unable to immediately comprehend the true
circumstances leading to the death of the deceased.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has
submitted that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
passed by the learned Trial Court is legal, just, and proper
and has been passed after thorough appreciation of the oral
as well as documentary evidence available on record. The
learned Trial Court has assigned cogent, convincing, and well-
reasoned findings while acquitting the respondents-accused,
and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court.
7.1 Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the
prosecution has failed to prove the charges levelled against
the respondent beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence led by
the prosecution suffers from material contradictions,
omissions, and inconsistencies, which create serious doubt
about the veracity of the prosecution case. The prosecution
has failed to establish the essential ingredients of the alleged
offences and has not produced reliable, trustworthy, and
corroborative evidence connecting the respondent with the
commission of the alleged offence.
7.2 It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the
Page 8 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
presumption of innocence in favour of an accused is further
strengthened by an order of acquittal. Unless the findings
recorded by the Trial Court are shown to be perverse, illegal,
or contrary to the evidence on record, the Appellate Court
should be slow in interfering with an order of acquittal.
7.3 It is submitted that the appellant has failed to point out
any infirmity, illegality, perversity, or misreading of evidence
in the impugned judgment and order. The findings recorded
by the learned Trial Court are based upon proper appreciation
of the evidence and settled legal principles.
7.4 In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is
submitted that the present appeal is devoid of merits and
deserves to be dismissed. The impugned judgment and order
of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court therefore
deserves to be confirmed.
8. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and order, as well
as the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for
both sides, the issues that arises for consideration before this
Court are as under:-
Whether the learned Trial Court has committed any
error in appreciating the oral as well as the documentary
evidence?
Whether the learned Trial Court has committed any
error in appreciating the evidence led by the
prosecution?
Whether the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
suffers from any illegality or perversity?
9. Now, considering the aforesaid facts and the issue involved
Page 9 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
in the present appeal, it is appropriate to first examine the
factual matrix of the case.
10. The deceased, Sushilaben, was married to the son of
present respondent numbers 1 and 2, namely Deepak
Ramkrishna Tripathi, about 15 years prior. During the
wedlock, the deceased delivered two sons, aged 9 years and 5
years respectively at the time of the incident. On account of
household quarrels, the deceased, along with her husband
and minor children, started residing separately from the
present respondents. However, the present respondents
instigated her husband, and upon their instigation, the
husband did not treat the deceased Sushilaben well and
physically and mentally harassed her. Consequently, on
13.02.2005, the deceased committed suicide by hanging
herself.
11. Thereafter, the First Information Report came to be
lodged by Vishwanath Ramchandra Chaturvedi, the father of
the deceased, Sushilaben, on 28.02.2005, whereas the
incident had occurred on 13.02.2005 at about 1:15 p.m. Thus,
the FIR came to be registered after a delay of approximately
15 days from the date of the incident. The FIR contained
detailed allegations and also arraigned the present accused
persons, although they were admittedly not residing with the
deceased at the relevant point of time.
12. It appears from the record that, initially, an Accidental
Death (A.D.) entry, being A.D. No. 20 of 2005, was registered.
The said entry was recorded on the information furnished by
Page 10 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
one Mamtaben. PW-10, who was then serving as the Officer-
in-Charge of Amraiwadi Police Station, received a telephonic
message at about 1:15 p.m. regarding the incident. Upon
receiving the information, PW-10 immediately proceeded to
the place of occurrence, registered the accidental death, and
commenced the investigation. He drew the inquest
panchnama, recorded the statements of nearby witnesses, and
summoned the forensic expert, Mr.Khandelwal, Assistant
Director, Forensic Science Laboratory. The scene of offence
panchnama was thereafter prepared in his presence.
13. After about 15 days from the accidental death, on
28.02.2005, the complainant (the father of the deceased)
lodged the FIR against the present respondents accused,
which was recorded by PW-10. PW-10 admitted that during
the course of the investigation, it was revealed that the
deceased was very emotional and would get easily excited or
upset over petty matters, and under those circumstances, she
had perhaps committed suicide.
14. It appears from the record that on the date of the incident
(13.02.2005), all the family members were present, but at that
time, they did not lodge any complaint. PW-10 further
admitted that during the investigation into the accidental
death, he recorded the statements of several witnesses, and
no facts regarding dowry, ill-treatment, or harassment were
disclosed. Under these circumstances, the narrative put
forward by the prosecution witnesses was unsupported. It was
also revealed that the present FIR was registered only after
persuasion by family members, which explains why these
Page 11 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
detailed allegations were subsequently brought against the
present respondents.
15. Although it is an admitted fact that the deceased was
residing with her husband and children at a separate location,
while Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 resided elsewhere and
Respondent No. 6, being a sister-in-law married to
Respondent No. 5, resided at her matrimonial home they have
all been arraigned as accused in the present offence.
16. Furthermore, upon examining the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses–namely PW-1 (the father), PW-2 (the
brother of the deceased), PW-8, and PW-9 there is no material
against the present respondents to connect them with the
crime in question, nor is there evidence that they provided
any incitement or abetment to the deceased for the alleged
incident of suicide.
17. At this stage, it is appropriate to refer the provisions of
Section 498A and 306 of the IPC, which are reproduced
hereunder :
Section 498A-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; orPage 12 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
(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.
Section 306- Abetment of suicide.–
If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of
such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
18. So far as section 498-A of 306 IPC is concerned, it is also
appropriate to refer the decision of this Court in cases of
State Of Gujarat Versus Ashvinbhai Naginbhai Tandel
reported in 2025 (0) GUJHC 20677, State Of Gujarat Versus
Bhaveshbhai Manilalbhai Patel reported in 2025 (2) GLR 923,
State Of Gujarat Versus Haji Haroon Meman reported in 2026
(0) GUJHC 7002 as well as the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the cases of Ramesh Kumar Versus State Of
Chhattisgarh reported in 2001 (9) SCC 618 and Ram Pyarey
Versus State Of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2025 (6) SCC 820.
In the absence of even the slightest evidence on record from
which such an inference can reasonably be drawn against the
respondents regarding the commission of the alleged
offences, the statutory presumption cannot be invoked.
19. It further appears that so far as the presumption or
inference under Section 107 of the IPC is concerned during
the entire 15-year span of the marriage, no grievance was
ever raised against the present respondents in the past.
Furthermore, no remote incident was cited by any of the
Page 13 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
witnesses that could be termed as cruelty or ill-treatment
meted out to the deceased. Even throughout these 15 years,
the prosecution witnesses failed to demonstrate any instance
where the respondents raised demands as alleged. Upon a
perusal of the depositions of these witnesses particularly
during their cross-examinations, no specific details were
disclosed regarding the manner or time in which the
respondents allegedly harassed, mentally or physically
tortured, or demanded dowry from the deceased.
Consequently, all these allegations appear to be afterthoughts
made by the complainant and his family members 15 days
after the incident. Moreover, as recorded and observed by the
learned Trial Court, material contradictions and omissions
were duly proved through the deposition of the Investigating
Officer (IO).
20. On a perusal of the reasoning recorded by the learned
Trial Judge in Paragraph Nos. 15 to 20.5, and after
considering all the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court
held that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses fails to
fulfill or satisfy the basic ingredients of Section 306 read with
Sections 498A, 107, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, or even
the allegations under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
21. It was further observed by the learned Trial Court that the
defense examined a witness, namely Rambabu Sudama Prasad
Chaturvedi (PW-1, Exh.51), whose daughter was also married
into the same family. His deposition revealed that the
deceased was suffering from depression and anxiety and was
Page 14 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
receiving medical treatment for the same, a fact that was also
known to the father of the deceased.
22. Even in paragraph No.38, after considering relevant
aspect and the evidence, the learned Trial Court has observed
as under:-
“(38) If all the evidence produced in this case is evaluated, the
facts mentioned herein below are observed which raise doubts on
the credibility of the Prosecution’s evidence.
(1) In this case, the parental family of the deceased have not
stated any fact that the deceased was subjected to physical
and mental torture by the present accused persons in the
investigation of the Accidental Death entry of the deceased.
(2) The present complaint in this case has been filed after 15
days of the death of the deceased, wherein vague allegations
of physical and mental torture have been made.
(3) The reason stated in the complaint for delay in filing the
complaint cannot be accepted, and in those circumstances, it
can be accepted that the complaint was fabricated later.
(4) The deceased was living separately from the present
accused persons in the house constructed by her husband
for more than six months prior to the incident.
(5) Nobody among the present accused persons was present at
the place of the incident when the deceased committed
suicide and no evidence has been submitted on record to
show that the accused persons had met the deceased in the
recent past.
(6) In the present case, no clear evidence has been placed on
record to show that the accused persons instigated or
abetted the deceased to commit suicide.
(7) Accused Nos. 1 and 2 reside at Raebareli and had come to
Ahmedabad with a return ticket dated 19/02/2005 to attend
the marriage of Accused No. 4, Shardaprasad.
(8) Neither a complaint was filed by the prosecution witnesses,
nor any representation have been made before anyone
regarding the physical and mental torture of the deceased by
her in-laws during the long span of 15 years of married life
of the deceased.
(9) In this case, the complainant has retired from the police
department as an ASI and his son and son-in-law are
working as police constables. In that case, if the deceased
had any mental or physical torture by her in-laws, then they
would not have failed to make a complaint on the day of the
incident.
(10) The dead body of the deceased was initially handed over to
her parental family, who then handed it over to her in-laws,Page 15 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
and the last rites of the deceased were performed at her
marital home, where all members of the parental family of
the deceased were present.
(11) In this case, the statements of the residents of the
neighborhood have been recorded during the investigation
of the Accidental Death entry and no evidence emerged
during the investigation from them to indicate that the
deceased was tortured by them or that they had any quarrels
there.
(12) In this case, the complainant had adopted Priyanka, the
daughter of their cousin brother, her marriage has also been
arranged with accused no. 4 Sharada Prasad with the
consent of the complainant. If the deceased had been any
torture by the accused persons, then they would not have
arranged the marriage of their adopted daughter, Priyanka,
into the family of the accused persons.
(13) There is no evidence that there is no relationship between
the present complainant and his cousin brother; under such
circumstances, the fact that the said defence witness is
giving false testimony to protect the accused persons cannot
be accepted.
(14) The deceased was suffering from depression prior to the
incident and was undergoing treatment for the same.
(15) In this case, the married life of the deceased was for a
period of about 15 years, so as per the provisions of the
Indian Evidence Act, the court does not have to make any
inference and the Prosecution should prove its case beyond
a reasonable doubt, which the prosecution has failed to
prove.
(16) The accused of this case, Poonamben and her husband have
been living separately from the family of the accused
persons at Sabarmati since their marriage in 1995 and there
is no evidence on record as to when they used to visit the
house of the deceased and what kind of torture was being
inflicted.
(17) The house for which money was being demanded by the
accused persons stands in the name of the husband of the
deceased, wherein the deceased was residing, and no
complaint has been filed by the parental family of the
deceased against the husband of the deceased.
(18) In the present case, when the deceased committed suicide,
she was residing with her husband alone. There is no
evidence on record to show that the present witnesses had
met her prior to that and any conversation regarding torture
had taken place.
(19) The Defence Witness Rambabu Sudamaprasad Chaturvedi
has also produced evidence that the deceased used to get
angry and suffered from depression, and evidence was
produced indicating that she was undergoing treatment for
the same.
Page 16 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
(20) The neighbors residing where the deceased lived state that
the deceased and her husband lived peacefully and that the
deceased was not tortured.
(21) The Defence Witness clearly states in his testimony that the
complainant had told him that Sushila had committed
suicide in anger.
(22) There is no evidence as to when and how much money was
asked to be brought by the accused persons from the
parental home.
(23) No dowry was demanded or given at the time of the
marriage of the deceased.
(24) There is no evidence that any torture as defined in Section
498(2) of the Indian Penal Code was inflicted.”
23. Under the circumstances narrated in Paragraph No. 38,
the Trial Court is unable to accept the case of the prosecution
and has, therefore, rightly rejected the allegations brought
against the present respondents.
24. It is an admitted fact that Respondent No. 5 was married
to Respondent No. 6. Respondent No. 5 was serving in the
Railway Department and, for most of the time, was not even
present in the city of Ahmedabad. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6
were residing in the Chandkheda area. Therefore, under the
circumstances, it appears from the record that the possibility
of false implication of the accused persons cannot be ruled
out.
25. In the present case, it is evident that all the family
members of the husband were arraigned as accused, namely,
the father-in-law, mother-in-law, two brothers-in-law, and
even the sister-in-law, who had been married approximately
ten years prior to the incident. This further strengthens the
inference that there was a tendency to implicate the entire
family. It is also required to be observed that both the
children have been residing with their father. The elder son of
Page 17 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
the deceased, Sushilaben, is now married and well settled in
his life. The husband has not remarried. The younger son had
pursued his studies in the USA. Both the children of the
deceased, Sushilaben, were nurtured and brought up by their
father and his family members, and they are now living
happily. Under these circumstances, and considering that
approximately 21 years have elapsed since the incident of
2005, the impugned judgment and order of acquittal do not
warrant any interference.
26 . On perusal of the record of the appeal, it transpires that
the respondent-accused has established his innocence before
the learned Trial Court and that, after due appreciation of the
oral as well as documentary evidence and other material
placed on record, the learned Trial Court has rightly passed
the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The findings
recorded by the learned Trial Court are just, proper and in
accordance with the settled principles of law and, therefore,
no interference is warranted by this Court.
27. It is well settled by catena of decisions that the Appellate
Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and reconsider
the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
However, Appellate Court 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 their
Page 18 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened
by the trial Court.
28. Further, if two reasonable conclusions are possible on
the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court
should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the
trial Court. Further, 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 the accused are connected with the commission
of the crime with which he is charged.
29. The scope and principles are enunciated by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in case of Chandrappa and others Vs. State of
Karnataka reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, more particularly
paragraph Nos. 42 and 43, which was subsequently re-
affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court Rajesh Prasad Vs. State
Page 19 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
of Bihar and another, reported in [2022] 3 SCC 471,
wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court has enunciated the general
principles in case of acquittal, more particularly in paragraph
No. 26 the general principles are set out by the Hon’ble Apex
Court based upon various decisions of the Hon’ble Apex
Court. Then in case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar
Vs. State of Karnataka, reported in AIR 2024 SC 2252 =
(2024) 8 SCC 149, the Hon’ble Apex Court has dealt with
the similar issue, more particularly, in paragraph Nos. 37 to
40. Hence, I am in complete agreement with the findings
recorded by the trial Court.
30. It is also worthwhile to refer to the recent decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh vs. State of
Karnataka, reported in [2024] 9 SCC 169, wherein the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held and observed in paras-20
and 21 as under:-
“20. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to the general
principles culled out by this Court in Chandrappa and others vs.
State of Karnataka , regarding the power of the appellate Court
while dealing with an appeal against a judgment of acquittal. The
principles read thus:
“42. …. (1) An appellate court has full power to review,
reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of
acquittal is founded.
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 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 thePage 20 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
nature of “flourishes of language” to emphasize 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 recorded by the trial court.
21. In Rajendra Prasad v. State of Bihar, a three-Judge Bench of
this Court pointed out that it would be essential for the High
Court, in an appeal against acquittal, to clearly indicate firm and
weighty grounds from the record for discarding the reasons of the
Trial Court in order to be able to reach a contrary conclusion of
guilt of the accused. It was further observed that, in an appeal
against acquittal, it would not be legally sufficient for the High
Court to take a contrary view about the credibility of witnesses
and it is absolutely imperative that the High Court convincingly
finds it well-nigh impossible for the Trial Court to reject their
testimony. This was identified as the quintessence of the
jurisprudential aspect of criminal justice. Viewed in this light, the
brusque approach of the High Court in dealing with the appeal,
resulting in the conviction of Appellant Nos. 1 and 2, reversing
the cogent and well-considered judgment of acquittal by the Trial
Court giving them the benefit of doubt, cannot be sustained.”
31. Considering the entire evidence on record, it clearly
appears that there is no credible evidence to connect the
present accused with the alleged crime and the evidence on
record is not so convincing to prove beyond reasonable doubt
that the accused has committed the alleged crime. Therefore,
the accused cannot be convicted on the evidence on record.
32. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it
clearly transpires that the trial Court has not committed any
Page 21 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/998/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026
undefined
error of fact and law in appreciating the evidence on record
and in acquitting the accused from the charges levelled
against them. Even on re-appreciation of the evidence, it
clearly transpires that the prosecution has miserably failed to
prove the charge levelled against the accused beyond
reasonable doubt. Therefore, the impugned judgment and
order of the trial Court is sustainable and the present appeal
is liable to be dismissed.
33. In view of the above, the present appeal is devoid of
merits and it deserves to be dismissed. Resultantly, it is
dismissed. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal
passed by the trial Court is hereby confirmed. Bail bond
stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the
concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
Page 22 of 22
Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 20:59:05 IST 2026
