State Of Gujarat vs Ranjitbhai Bachubhai Chavda Rajput on 8 April, 2026

    0
    46
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Gujarat High Court

    State Of Gujarat vs Ranjitbhai Bachubhai Chavda Rajput on 8 April, 2026

                                                                                                                             NEUTRAL CITATION
    
    
    
    
                               R/CR.A/990/2012                                            CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
    
                                                                                                                              undefined
    
    
    
    
                                                                                      Reserved On   : 24/03/2026
                                                                                      Pronounced On : 08/04/2026
    
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
    
                                                  R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 990 of 2012
    
                          ==========================================================
                                                        STATE OF GUJARAT
                                                              Versus
                                           RANJITBHAI BACHUBHAI CHAVDA RAJPUT & ORS.
                          ==========================================================
                          Appearance:
                          MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
                          MS TULSI GOSWAMI FOR MR TULSHI R SAVANI(3070) for the
                          Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
                          ==========================================================
    
                            CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
    
    
                                                                  CAV JUDGMENT
    

    1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

    judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.11.2011, passed by
    rd
    the learned 3 Additional District and Sessions Judge,

    SPONSORED

    Bhavnagar camp at Mahuva, in Sessions Case No.158 of

    2010, for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A)

    and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant – State of

    Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the

    Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”).

    2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial

    before the trial Court is that the complainant’s sister, who

    was married to accused no.1 and residing in her matrimonial

    joint family, was subjected to continuous mental and physical

    harassment by the accused persons. She had repeatedly

    Page 1 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    informed the complainant about such ill-treatment and had

    even returned to her parental home expressing unwillingness

    to go back. However, she was sent back after assurances

    from the accused side. Shortly thereafter, she committed

    suicide by jumping into a well. It is alleged that due to such

    harassment, the accused abetted her suicide, leading to the

    registration of the offence under Sections 498(A), 306, and 34

    of the Indian Penal Code.

    3. After investigation, sufficient prima facie evidence

    was found against the accused person/s and therefore charge-

    sheet was filed in the competent criminal Court. Since the

    offence alleged against the accused person/s was exclusively

    triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate

    committed the case to the Sessions Court where it came to
    be registered as Sessions Case No.158 of 2010. The charge

    was framed against the accused person/s. The accused

    pleaded not guilty and came to be tried.

    4. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution

    has examined 17 witnesses and also produced 25

    documentary evidence before the Trial Court, which are

    described in the impugned judgment as under:

    Page 2 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    Oral Evidence

    Sr.No. Witness Exhibit

    1 Hanubhai Hamirbhai Gohil 17

    2 Bavanji Danabhai Rabari 19

    3 Bharatbhai Bachubhai 22

    4 Bhanudanas Haridas 24

    5 Kanubhai Hamirbhai Gohil 25

    6 Kanaksinhbhai Kalubha 29

    7 Boghabhai Bholabhai 31

    8 Popatbhai Kalubhai 32

    9 Bhanabhai Dudabhai 33

    10 Ashokbhai Laljibhai Vadher 36

    11 Malujibhai Hamirbhai 45

    12 Raniben Hamirbhai 46

    13 Shituba Shivubhai Gohil 47

    14 Dharubhai Masribhai 48

    15 Nanalal Gaurishankar Laghva 51

    16 Bavanjibhai Danabhai Rabari 56

    17 Pradyuman Kishansinh Chavda 60

    Page 3 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    Documentary Evidence

    Sr.No. Details Exhibit

    1 complaint 18

    2 Note regarding assignment of investigation 20

    3 Communication sent by D.Y.S.P. to P.S.I. 21

    Bagdana for registering the complaint

    4 Panchnama of seizure of samples 23

    5 Inquest Panchnama 26

    6 Arrest Panchnama 27

    7 Panchnama of the scene of offence 30

    8 Post-mortem form 37

    9 Letter sent by A.S.I., Mahuva Police 38

    Station, for conducting post-mortem

    10 Post-mortem note/report 39

    11 Medical certificate issued by the Medical 40

    Officer of the Municipal Medical Unit

    12 Letter by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) for 41

    obtaining the post-mortem note

    13 Letter issued by the Resident Medical 42

    Officer of the Municipal Medical Unit to

    the F.S.L., Ahmedabad for chemical

    Page 4 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    analysis

    14 Forwarding letter of F.S.L. 43

    15 Serological report of F.S.L. 44

    16 Copy of Station Diary 52

    17 Fax message sent by P.S.O. to superior 53

    officer regarding accidental death

    18 M.L.C. report forwarded by Municipal 54

    Medical Unit, Mahuva

    19 Communication by P.S.O., Mahuva to P.S.I. 55

    Bagdana regarding forwarding of case

    papers

    20 Fax message sent by P.S.I. to superior 57

    officer regarding the present offence

    21 Fax message sent by P.S.I. seeking 58

    assistance of a lady constable

    22 Arrest memo of accused Kunvarba 61

    Bachubhai

    23 Dispatch entry regarding sending 62

    muddamal (case property) to F.S.L.

    24 Receipt of F.S.L. 63

    25 Communication sent to F.S.L. regarding 64, 65

    return of muddamal (case property)

    Page 5 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    5. After hearing both the parties and after analysis

    of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial

    Judge acquitted the accused for the offences for which the

    charge was framed, by holding that the prosecution has failed

    to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

    6. Learned APP for the appellant – State has

    pointed out the facts of the case and having taken this Court

    through both, oral and documentary evidence, recorded before

    the learned trial Court, would submit that the learned trial

    Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and

    perspective; and that the trial Court has committed error in

    acquitting the accused. It is submitted that the learned trial

    Court ought not to have given much emphasis to the
    contradictions and/or omissions appearing in the evidence and

    ought to have given weightage to the dots that connect the

    accused with the offence in question. It is submitted that

    the learned trial Court has erroneously come to the

    conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It

    is also submitted that the learned Judge ought to have seen

    that the evidence produced on record is reliable and

    believable and it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that

    the accused had committed an offence in question. It is,

    therefore, submitted that this Court may allow this appeal by

    Page 6 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    appreciating the evidence led before the learned trial Court.

    7. As against that, learned advocate for the

    respondent/s would support the impugned judgment passed by

    the learned trial Court and has submitted that the learned

    trial Court has not committed any error in acquitting the

    accused. The trial Court has taken possible view as the

    prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable

    doubt. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present appeal

    by confirming the impugned judgment and order passed by

    the learned trial Court.

    8. In the aforesaid background, considering the oral

    as well as documentary evidence on record, independently and

    dispassionately and considering the impugned judgment and
    order of the trial Court, the following aspects weighed with

    the Court:

    8.1. The prosecution has mainly relied on the complaint

    which is filed by the brother of the deceased which is

    produced vide exhibit 18, wherein it is the case of the

    prosecution that, whenever the deceased Raghuba used to

    come from her matrimonial home to her parental house, she

    used to state that the accused used to falsely blame the

    deceased and the accused used to harass her and on all

    Page 7 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    occasions the family members of the deceased used to console

    the deceased and send her back to her matrimonial home.

    8.2. It is a case of prosecution that before 15 days from the

    date of incident, the brother-in-law of the deceased Mulubhai,

    had come to drop the deceased at her parental house and at

    that time when the complainant had asked the deceased as

    to why she had come to her parental house, she had

    informed that she does not want to stay at her matrimonial

    home and that the accused are suspecting the character of

    the deceased and are not keeping the deceased at their house

    and are constantly taunting her and the deceased was tired

    of constant taunts given by the accused. In the said

    complaint produced vide exhibit-18, it has also been stated

    that just before one day from the date of incident, the
    brother-in-law of the deceased had come to get the deceased

    to her house on the ground that the accused no.1 was not

    well and the complainant again consoled the deceased that

    all will be well when she reaches the matrimonial home and

    thereafter, the deceased was sent to her matrimonial home

    along with her brother-in-law.

    8.3. On 28.06.2010, the complainant received a phone call

    from his cousin Dhirubhai Masibhai that the deceased has

    expired as she fell in a well and in the complaint it has

    Page 8 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    been stated that since one and a half years, the deceased

    has been constantly harassed and the accused are taunting

    the deceased of her character and have abused her and

    therefore, she has committed suicide.

    8.4. According to the complaint filed vide exhibit 16, the

    complainant’s sister, Raghuba, used to frequently return from

    her matrimonial home. At that time, her husband Ranjitbhai,

    Bachubhai, and her mother-in-law Kunwarba would repeatedly

    make false allegations against her, abuse her verbally, and

    subject her to physical harassment. The complainant would do

    counselling of her and send her back to her matrimonial

    home. About fifteen days prior to the incident, Raghuba was

    brought back by her brother-in-law Mulubhai, and stated that

    she could not continue living at her matrimonial home. She
    further said that her husband and mother-in-law were casting

    false doubts on her character and did not wish to keep her

    in the house, and they would taunt her constantly. Due to

    this harassment, she kept returning to her parental home.

    On the evening prior to the incident, at around 05:00 PM,

    her brother-in-law Mulubhai came and took her back, stating

    that Ranjitbhai was ill. On 28.06.2010, at around 08:00 AM,

    the complainant received a phone call from Dhirubhai, the

    son of his aunt residing in Dungarpur, informing him that

    Raghuben had fallen into a well and died.

    Page 9 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    8.5. The prosecution has examined the complainant -Hanubhai

    Hamirbhai Gohil as P.W.1 vide exhibit 17. In his deposition

    he has admitted that he had not filed any complaint before

    any police station of harassment alleged to have been done

    by the accused on her sister during the lifetime of her sister

    nor is there any complaint filed by the deceased before any

    police station of the fact that the accused were doubting the

    character of the deceased. He has also admitted that the said

    fact was not informed to the sarpanch of the village and or

    any of the elders and leaders of their community and it is

    only after the death of the deceased Raghuben that for the

    first time he has filed a complaint that the accused used to

    suspect the character of the deceased. He has also admitted

    that the deceased i.e. the sister of the complainant was
    getting treatment for her mental health from Dr.Kamlesh J.

    Shah. In his deposition he has stated that the deceased was

    his sister. About one and a half years prior to the incident,

    his sister was married to Ranjitbhai Chavda at village

    Dungarpur. After his sister went to her matrimonial home,

    she used to visit her parental home. During such visits, his

    sister used to inform him that her in-laws and husband

    would behave improperly with her, make remarks against

    her, and subject her to harassment. His sister had no

    children. It is further stated that his sister fell into a well.

    Page 10 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    On the previous day before the incident, her brother-in-law

    had come to their house and taken his sister back. The

    complainant further deposed that his sister used to tell him

    that she was being harassed and that her husband and in-

    laws were casting doubts upon her character.

    8.6. The prosecution has examined Police Inspector Bavanji

    Danabhai Rabari as P.W.2 vide exhibit-19. In his deposition,

    he has stated that on 28.06.2010, upon receiving information

    of an accidental death at Bagdana Police Station, he took up

    the investigation. During the course of investigation, Shri

    Hanubhai Gohil appeared before him and lodged his

    complaint, which was recorded as per his narration and duly

    signed by him. In the cross-examination, this witness has

    admitted that the place of incident falls on the road between
    Mahuva and Bagdana, and that he had not immediately

    visited the spot. He has further admitted that at the time of

    recording the complaint, four to five village elders were

    present, yet he did not record their statements. He was the

    Police Inspector at Bagdana Police Station. The prosecution

    has thereafter examined Bharatbhai Bachchubhai at exhibit-22

    as P.W.3. He is the panch witness of the panchnama

    produced vide exhibit 23, whereby the liquid was recovered at

    the time of postmortem from the body of the deceased. The

    other witness of the said panchnama produced vide exhibit-

    Page 11 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    23, has been examined vide exhibit-24-Bhanudas Haridas as

    P.W.4, both have turned hostile and have not supported the

    case of the prosecution.

    8.7. The prosecution has thereafter examined Kanubhai

    Hamirbhai Gohil the brother of the deceased, has been

    examined on behalf of the prosecution at Exhibit 25. He has

    stated that on 28.06.2010, the police called him to the post-

    mortem room at the Government Hospital, where the dead

    body of Raghubai was lying on the table.upon examination of

    the body found no marks of injury. According to him, the

    deceased had died due to drowning. Further, this witness has

    stated that Hanubhai had informed him that, due to

    matrimonial discord and household issues, his sister Raghubai

    had returned to her parental home. He has also stated that
    he does not have any personal knowledge as to the exact

    cause of death of the deceased, and that he had only heard

    that she died due to mental harassment caused by her

    husband and in-laws. He was the panch witness of the

    inquest panchnama, which is produced vide exhibit 26. The

    said inquest panchnama, does not indicate any external injuries on the
    body of the deceased.

    8.8. Further, Dr. Ashokbhai Vadher has been examined at

    Exhibit 36. Dr. Ashokbhai stated that the dead body was

    Page 12 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    received on 28th June 2010 at about 2:30 PM. The post-

    mortem commenced at 2:50 PM and was completed at 4:50

    PM. No external injuries were found on the body, nor were

    any fractures detected. The doctor further opined that if a

    person jumps into a well, such a death is possible. In cross-

    examination, the doctor admitted that if a person goes near a

    well to fetch water or for any other purpose, and the well is

    deep, such a death could occur due to accidental slipping and

    falling. He further stated that if a person is suffering from

    an anxiety-related neurotic disorder, their mental condition

    may be unstable, and in such a state, it cannot be certainly

    said what actions such a person might take. Thus, from the

    medical evidence of the doctor, it appears that the deceased

    may have committed suicide.

    8.9. The prosecution has thereafter examined Kanaksinhbhai

    Kalubha as P.W.6 vide exhibit-29. He is the panch witness of

    scene of offense which is produced vide exhibit-30. He is the

    sarpanch of village-Dungarpur. In his cross-examination he

    has stated that there was no disturbance in the family life of

    the deceased. He has also stated that he has signed on the

    prepared panchnama and he has also admitted that the

    deceased was mentally ill and was taking medicine for the

    same. However, he does not support the case of the

    prosecution and has not stated any facts regarding the cause

    Page 13 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    of death of the deceased. On the contrary, he has deposed

    that the matrimonial life of the deceased was running

    smoothly.

    8.10. The prosecution has examined Boghabhai Bholabhai as

    P.W.7 vide exhibit-31. He is the panch witness of inquest

    panchnama produced vide exhibit-26. In his deposition, he has

    stated that on 28.07.2010, the police explained to him at the

    post-mortem room of Mahuva Municipal Hospital that an

    inquest panchnama of the deceased, Raghuben, was to be

    carried out. Thereafter, he voluntarily acted as a panch

    witness, and along with two other panchas, remained present

    for the said panchnama. Upon perusal of the deposition of

    this witness, it appears that although he was present with

    Hanubhai at the time of lodging the complaint, he has only
    deposed regarding the inquest panchnama and has not stated

    any facts as to what was narrated to him by Hanubhai or

    whether he had any knowledge about the incident. This

    witness has been declared hostile. As discussed hereinabove,

    he has not stated any facts regarding the cause of death of

    Raghuben. He has turned hostile and has not supported the

    case of the prosecution.

    8.11. The prosecution has thereafter examined cousin of the

    complainant Popatbhai Kalubhai vide exhibit 32 as P.W.8. He

    Page 14 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    has in his cross-examination stated that he was informed

    that the deceased accidentally fell in the well. He has also in

    his deposition stated that the police had not taken his

    statement at the time of incident and he had not given any

    statement to the police. He also stated that he had never

    visited the matrimonial home of his sister and had no

    personal knowledge regarding how she was treated there or

    about her personal life. He has deposed that his testimony is

    based solely on what was told to him by Hanubhai.

    8.12. The uncle of the deceased Bhanabhai Dudhabhai has

    been examined as P.W.9 vide exhibit-33. This witness has

    stated that Hanubhai resides in their village and is related

    to him. Upon perusal of the deposition of this witness,

    certain new facts emerge. According to this witness, the
    mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased were not

    saying anything to her, and he has not at all stated

    anything regarding allegations on the character of the

    deceased. In his cross-examination, he admitted that the

    police had neither recorded his statement nor made any

    inquiry with him. He has further admitted that he had not

    informed the police about the circumstances in which the

    deceased died. He has also stated that his niece, Raghuben,

    was taking treatment from a doctor at Bhavnagar for mental

    illness and was also under medication for headaches. Thus,

    Page 15 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    this witness also does not support the case of the

    prosecution.

    8.13. The Medical Officer who had carried out the

    postmortem has been examined at exhibit-36 as P.W.10 and

    the postmortem report is produced vide exhibit-39 and the

    cause of death as stated in the postmortem report was

    cardiorespiratory arrest because of asphyxia falling because of

    drowning.

    8.14. The prosecution has thereafter examined the younger

    brother of the complainant vide exhibit-45 as P.W.11. He in

    his cross examination has stated that the police met him

    after 2 days from the date of incident and other than asking

    for his name and address no other statement was taken by
    the police. He has also admitted that on festival occasions,

    the deceased used to come to her parental house and after

    the festival was over the family members from the in-laws of

    the deceased used to take the deceased to the matrimonial

    home. He is not aware as to what kind of relation did the

    deceased have at her matrimonial home. He has further

    admitted that he had not stated before the police that his

    sister was being taunted. Thus, this witness has not produced

    any clear or cogent evidence regarding the cause of death of

    the deceased, and there are material contradictions between

    Page 16 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    his deposition before the Court and his statement before the

    police.

    8.15. The mother of the deceased Raniben has been examined

    vide exhibit-46 as P.W.12. She has admitted that the

    deceased was getting treatment from Dr.Kamlesh Shah for

    her mental health. She has only stated that the accused used

    to taunt the deceased of her character. This witness has

    further admitted that she had not made any complaint to the

    elders of the community regarding the alleged accusations

    made against her daughter. It is pertinent to note that the

    allegation regarding a five-month pregnancy has not been

    mentioned by the complainant in his complaint, nor has it

    been brought on record that the deceased had narrated any

    such fact to her brother before the police. Thus, the evidence
    of this witness appears to be unclear and inconsistent and

    does not align with the case put forward by the prosecution.

    8.16. The neighbour and cousin of the deceased Shituba

    Shivubha Gohil has been examined as P.W.13 vide exhibit-47.

    She has stated that the husband of the deceased used to

    consume alcohol. She has stated that the deceased had not

    informed her as to what was disturbing the deceased. She in

    her examination-in-chief has stated that the accused used to

    accuse the deceased of her character. In her cross-

    Page 17 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    examination, she has stated that, it is true that the deceased

    had never informed her about any of the trouble that she

    used to face at her matrimonial home. She has also admitted

    that the deceased was being treated for her headaches. She

    has also admitted that the fact of the husband returning

    home after consuming alcohol was not stated in her police

    statement. She had further admitted that the police had

    merely inquired about her name and had not recorded any

    detailed statement. It is also admitted that the deceased was

    suffering from headaches and was under medical treatment.

    8.17. The prosecution has thereafter examined Dharubai

    Masribhai vide exhibit-48 as P.W. 14, who is the cousin of

    the deceased. Upon perusal of her deposition, it appears that

    this witness has been declared hostile and does not support
    the case of the prosecution in any manner. He has stated

    that she has no knowledge as to how Raghuben died or

    about the nature of her matrimonial life.

    8.18. The prosecution has thereafter examined the police

    officer, who had taken the initial complaint and handed over

    the investigation to Mr.Nanalal Gaurishankar Vadhva vide

    exhibit-51 as P.W.15.

    8.19. The prosecution has thereafter examined Bavanjibhai

    Page 18 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    Danabhai Rabari, who was initially examined as P.W.2.

    8.20. The P.S.I. Pradhyuman Kishansinh Chavda has been

    examined vide exhibit-60 as P.W.17. The defense has

    examined as defense witness no.1-Dr. Kamlesh Shah, vide

    exhibit-73 and from his deposition, it transpires that the

    deceased was suffering from angiitis neurosis and she was in

    his treatment. At least since 11.01.2010, when clinical

    examination of the brain of the deceased was done by him.

    He has produced the documentary proof of prescription and

    the medical certificates vide exhibit-74.

    8.21. From the entire evidence, the prosecution has not been

    able to pinpoint that because of the cruel behavior of the

    accused, the deceased has committed suicide.

    8.22. The prosecution has also not been able to prove that

    persistent unbearable nature, harassment by the accused has

    led the deceased to take the extreme step. The prosecution

    has also not been able to prove by independent evidence that

    the accused have committed offence under Sections 306,

    498(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution has

    also not been able to prove that the accused have

    intentionally aided and instigated the deceased to commit

    suicide.

    Page 19 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    8.23. The prosecution has also not been able to prove that

    there was active and direct act of the accused which drew

    the deceased to commit suicide. The trial Court has taken

    into consideration the evidence of the prosecution and also

    taken into consideration the deposition of Dr.Kamlesh Shah

    who was the defence witness no.1, who has been examined

    vide exhibit-73, that the deceased herself was suffering from

    mental health and was under his treatment.

    9.1 The evidence on record and the glaring omission

    on the prosecution as pointed out above leaves no room of

    doubt that the order passed by the trial Court is as per law.

    The trial Court has rightly held that there was no positive

    evidence on record to prove that the accused by way of the

    conduct or spoken words, overtly or covertly, actually aided

    and abetted or instigated the deceased in such a manner

    that it leaves no other option for the deceased but to commit

    suicide. In the present case, the prosecution has also not

    been able to prove the clear motive of the accused to commit

    offence of abatement. There is also no close connection

    between the accused’s action and the deceased’s choice to

    commit suicide. In view of the said fact, the prosecution has

    not been able to prove that the accused have stimulated the

    deceased to commit suicide.

    Page 20 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    9.2 The prosecution has not proved that there was a

    clear motive to commit the offence of abatement. The

    prosecution has also not proved that the accused proceeded to

    encourage and/or irritate the deceased through words or

    insults and that the accused intended to urge the deceased to

    end it all by committing suicide. The prosecution has also

    not been able to prove the direct connection between the

    incitement and committal of suicide. The prosecution has also

    not been able to prove direct or indirect act of incitement to

    the commitment of suicide. The prosecution has also not been

    able to prove by accusation of harassment without any

    positive action on the part of the accused close to the time

    of occurrence that led and forced the deceased to commit

    suicide.

    9.3 The present matter turns on whether the conduct

    attributed to the accused satisfies the legal threshold of

    abetment of suicide. Therefore, read as a whole, it can be

    said that mere occurrence of a suicide does not automatically

    trigger rigours of the Section. The penal consequences under

    Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code arise when the

    prosecution is able to establish that the accused abetted and

    had a role in provoking or facilitating that suicide. Therefore,

    this twin test distinction is required to be borne in mind.

    Page 21 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    9.4 Abetment, as understood in criminal jurisprudence,

    is not a broad moral expression but a term of precise

    statutory meaning. Section 107 IPC delineates its contours:

    instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding. Each of these

    modes presupposes active involvement. The law does not

    punish omission except in some cases, it punishes intentional

    encouragement or positive facilitation of a prohibited act.

    9.5 It is therefore not sufficient to show that the

    deceased was unhappy, distressed, or subjected to unpleasant

    treatment. The jurisprudence developed by the Hon’ble

    Supreme Court has consistently underscored that routine

    domestic disagreements, suspicion between spouses, or

    episodes of harassment do not ipso facto amount to

    instigation. Rigours of this Section intervene only where there
    is clear evidence of mens rea and a direct causal link

    between the accused’s conduct and the decision of the

    deceased to commit suicide.

    9.6 The concept of instigation demands something more

    than mere reproach or accusation. It connotes an active

    suggestion, an incitement, or conduct of such intensity that it

    operates upon the mind of the victim and pushes him or her

    toward this drastic and unfortunate step. The prosecution

    therefore, must demonstrate either a deliberate intention to

    Page 22 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    drive the deceased to suicide or knowledge that the conduct

    in question was likely to produce that consequence. Equally

    indispensable is the requirement of proximity. The law insists

    on a live and immediate nexus between the acts complained

    of and the suicide. A remote or generalized allegation is

    insufficient. There must be evidence showing that the accused

    engaged in conduct so closely connected in time and effect

    with the suicide that it can reasonably be said to have

    triggered the fatal act.

    9.7 No material has been brought on record

    demonstrating any proximate act immediately preceding the

    suicide which could be construed as instigation. Nor is there

    evidence of a positive act amounting to intentional aid. The

    essential ingredients of abetment -namely, culpable mental
    state coupled with active or proximate conduct-are not

    established.

    9.8 On an overall assessment of the evidence, the

    prosecution has failed to demonstrate the existence of the

    foundational elements necessary to sustain a conviction under

    Section 306 IPC.

    10. In the case of Mahendra K.C. v. State of

    Karnataka and another, [(2022) 2 SCC 129], it has been held

    Page 23 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the essence of abetment

    lies in instigating a person to do a thing or the intentional

    doing of that thing by an act or illegal omission. Instigation

    is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do

    “an act”. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it

    is not necessary that actual words must be used to that

    effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and

    specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable

    certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being

    spelt out. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion

    without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot

    be said to be instigation.

    10.1 In the case of Mahendra Awase v. State of

    Madhya Pradesh, 2025 (1) Crimes 347 (SC), the observations
    are made with regard to abetment of suicide. It has been

    held that in order to bring a case within purview of Section

    306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in commission

    of said offence, person who is said to have abetted

    commission of suicide must have played active role by act of

    instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate commission of

    suicide. It has been further observed that the act of

    abetment by person charged with said offence must be proved

    and established by prosecution before he could be convicted

    under Section 306 IPC. It is further observed that to satisfy

    Page 24 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    requirement of instigation, accused by his act or omission or

    by a continued course of conduct should have created such

    circumstances that deceased was left with no other option,

    except to commit suicide.

    10.2 In the case of Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu versus

    State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, it has been held

    that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be

    proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the

    commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment

    without there being any positive action proximate to the time

    of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or

    compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in terms

    of Section 306 IPC would not be sustainable.

    10.3 In the case of Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2020)
    15 SCC 359, after considering the provisions of Sections 306

    and 107 of IPC, the Court held that conviction under Section

    306 IPC is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment

    without there being any positive action proximate to the time

    of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or

    compelled the person to commit suicide.

    10.4 In the case of Amudha v. State, 2024 INSC 244,

    it was held that there has to be an act of incitement on the

    Page 25 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    part of the accused proximate to the date on which the

    deceased committed suicide. The act attributed should not

    only be proximate to the time of suicide but should also be

    of such a nature that the deceased was left with no

    alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.

    11. Further, learned APP is not in a position to show

    any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that

    the approach of the Court below is vitiated by some manifest

    illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the Court

    below has ignored the material evidence on record. In above

    view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion

    that the Court below was completely justified in passing

    impugned judgment and order.

    12. Considering the impugned judgment, the trial

    Court has recorded that there was no direct evidence

    connecting the accused with the incident and there are

    contradictions in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses.

    In absence of the direct evidence, it cannot be proved that

    the accused are involved in the offence. Further, the motive

    of the accused behind the incident is not established. The

    trial Court has rightly considered all the evidence on record

    and passed the impugned judgment. The trial Court has

    rightly evaluated the facts and the evidence on record.

    Page 26 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    13. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal

    appeal, the appellate court is not required to re-write the

    judgment or to give fresh reasoning, when the reasons

    assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper.

    Such principle is down by the Apex Court in the case of

    State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC

    1417 wherein it is held as under:

                                                   "...      This       court        has      observed     in      Girija
                                                   Nandini            Devi         V.       Bigendra          Nandini
                                                   Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC
                                                   1124)       that     it    is      not    the    duty      of    the
    

    appellate court when it agrees with the
    view of the trial court on the evidence to
    repeat the narration of the evidence or to
    reiterate the reasons given by the trial
    court expression of general agreement with
    the reasons given by the Court the decision
    of which is under appeal, will ordinarily
    suffice.”

    14. Thus, in case the appellate court agrees with the

    reasons and the opinion given by the lower court, then the

    discussion of evidence at length is not necessary.

    15. In the case of Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana,

    reported in AIR 1995 SC 280, Supreme Court has held as

    Page 27 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    under:

    “The powers of the High Court in an appeal
    from order of acquittal to reassess the
    evidence and reach its own conclusions
    under Sections 378 and 379, Cr.P.C. are as
    extensive as in any appeal against the order
    of conviction. But as a rule of prudence, it
    is desirable that the High Court should give
    proper weight and consideration to the view
    of the Trial Court with regard to the
    credibility of the witness, the presumption of
    innocence in favour of the accused, the right
    of the accused to the benefit of any doubt
    and the slowness of appellate Court in
    justifying a finding of fact arrived at by a
    Judge who had the advantage of seeing the
    witness. It is settled law that if the main
    grounds on which the lower Court has
    based its order acquitting the accused are
    reasonable and plausible, and the same

    cannot entirely and effectively be dislodged

    or demolished, the High Court should not

    disturb the order of acquittal.”

    16. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

    Page 28 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    case of Rajesh Singh & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

    reported in (2011) 11 SCC 444 and in the case of

    Bhaiyamiyan Alias Jardar Khan and Another vs. State of
    Madhya Pradesh
    reported in (2011) 6 SCC 394, while dealing
    with the judgment of acquittal, unless reasoning by the trial

    Court is found to be perverse, the acquittal cannot be upset.

    It is further observed that High Court’s interference in such

    appeal in somewhat circumscribed and if the view taken by

    the trial Court is possible on the evidence, the High Court

    should stay its hands and not interfere in the matter in the

    belief that if it had been the trial Court, it might have

    taken a different view.

    17. In the case of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka,

    reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, the Hon’ble Apex Court has
    observed as under:

    “42. From the above decisions, in our
    considered view, the following general
    principles regarding powers of the appellate
    court while dealing with an appeal against
    an order of acquittal emerge:

    (1) An appellate court has full power to
    review, reappreciate and reconsider the
    evidence upon which the order of acquittal
    is founded.

    Page 29 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    (2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 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 the nature of “flourishes of
    language” to emphasise 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

    Page 30 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    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.”

    18. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in a recent decision, in

    the case of Constable 907 Surendra Singh and Another V/s

    State of Uttarakhand reported in (2025) 5 SCC 433, has held
    in paragraph 24 as under:

    “24. It could thus be seen that it is a settled
    legal position that the interference with the
    finding of acquittal recorded by the learned
    trial Judge would be warranted by the High
    Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers
    from patent perversity; that the same is based
    on a misreading/omission to consider material
    evidence on record; and that no two
    reasonable views are possible and only the
    view consistent with the guilt of the accused

    Page 31 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/990/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026

    undefined

    is possible from the evidence available on
    record.”

    19. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

    of the case and law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

    while considering the scope of appeal under Section 378 of

    the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 no case is made out to

    interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.

    20. In view of above facts and circumstances of the

    case, on my careful re-appreciation of the entire evidence, I

    found that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the

    findings of fact recorded by learned trial Court and under

    the circumstances, the learned trial Court has rightly

    acquitted the respondent/s – accused for the elaborate reasons

    stated in the impugned judgment and I also endorse the
    view/finding of the learned trial Court leading to the

    acquittal.

    21. In view of the above and for the reasons stated
    above, the present Criminal Appeal fails and the same
    deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed, accordingly. Record
    & Proceedings be remitted to the concerned trial Court
    forthwith.

    Sd/-

    (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
    URIL RANA

    Page 32 of 32

    Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Wed Apr 08 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 08 22:51:08 IST 2026



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here