State Of Gujarat vs Ashokbhai Parshottambhai Gohil on 17 March, 2026

    0
    35
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Gujarat High Court

    State Of Gujarat vs Ashokbhai Parshottambhai Gohil on 17 March, 2026

                                                                                                                          NEUTRAL CITATION
    
    
    
    
                                R/CR.A/1967/2010                                         JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026
    
                                                                                                                          undefined
    
    
    
    
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
    
                                                   R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1967 of 2010
    
                           ==========================================================
                                                       STATE OF GUJARAT
                                                             Versus
                                             ASHOKBHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI GOHIL & ORS.
                           ==========================================================
                           Appearance:
                           MS. SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
                           BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
                           MR PARTH S TOLIA(5617) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
                           ==========================================================
    
                              CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
    
                                                               Date : 17/03/2026
    
                                                                 JUDGMENT
    

    1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

    judgment and order of acquittal dated 26.08.2010, passed by

    SPONSORED

    the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahuva, in Sessions

    Case No.135/2009, for the offences punishable under Sections

    498(A), 306 and 114 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 deceased, daughter of the

    complainant, was married to original accused No.1 according

    to their caste customs. The remaining accused were her in-

    laws, all residing together. It is alleged that the accused

    Page 1 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    persons continuously harassed the deceased, telling her that

    she was of bad character, causing severe mental distress.

    Unable to bear the harassment, the deceased committed

    suicide by jumping into a well.

    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.135/2009. 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 13 witnesses and also produced 13

    documentary evidences before the trial Court, which are

    described in the impugned judgment are as under;

    Oral Evidences

    Sr.No. Exh.No. Oral Evidence

    1. 9 Dr. Ashoklaljibhai Vadher

    2. 16 Mansukhbhai Naranbhai

    Page 2 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    3. 18 Nathuben Mansukhbhai

    4. 19 Maheshbhai Mansukhbhai Bhaliya

    5. 20 Vijaybhai Babubhai Bhaliya

    6. 21 Bharatbhai Kalubhai

    7. 23 Nathubhai Kalabhai

    8. 24 Bachubhai Kalubhai

    9. 26 Raghavandas Hemubhai Gadhvi

    10. 29 Gordhanbhai Ukabhai

    11. 30 Savjibhai Ghelabhai

    12. 31 Batukbhai Dayaljibhai Thakkar

    13. 13 Bavanji Danabhai Rabari

    Documentary Evidences

    Sr. No. Exh. No. Documentary Evidence

    1. 33 Declaration of Ashokbhai Parshottambhai.

    2. 17 Complaint of Mansukhbhai Naranbhai.

    3. 11 Inquest Panchnama of both the deceased.

    4. 12 Posthumous form of the deceased Kailash.

    5. 13 Posthumous form of the deceased Hardik.

    6. 48 FSL Bhavnagar’s report.

    7. 22 Panchnama of the place of offence.

    Page 3 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    8. 25 Arrest Panchnama of the accused.

    9. 14 PM note of the deceased Kailasben.

    10. 15 PM note of the deceased Hardik.

    11. 40 Viscera Report.

    12. 42 Biological Report.

    13. 27 Station Diary.

    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

    Page 4 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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

    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:

    Page 5 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    8.1 The entire case of the prosecution is based on the

    complaint filed vide Exh. 17, wherein the father of the

    deceased Kailashben has alleged that as the accused were

    doubting the character of the deceased Kailasben, and were

    mentally and physically harassing her, she had no other

    option, but to commit suicide along with her son Hardik,

    eventually she fell into the well and drowned herself. The

    prosecution has also tried to establish their case that there

    were constant quarrels between the deceased and the accused.

    For that reason, the deceased used to come to her parental

    house, and after settlement she was sent back to her

    matrimonial home. It is also stated that the said incident of

    harassment had taken place at least around ten times before

    she committed suicide.

    8.2 It is also stated in the said complaint that on

    22.07.2009, the deceased and her minor son Hardik had come

    to the parental house and stated that accused no. 1 had

    physically assaulted her because of the constant provocation

    from accused nos. 2 and 3, and thereafter, on 01.03.2009, the

    accused no. 1 had called the brother of the deceased,

    Mukesh, and had stated that he talked to the deceased and

    told her to reach village Bhadrod, and thereafter he will

    come to take deceased Kailasben from Bhadrod to her

    Page 6 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    matrimonial home.

    8.3 The prosecution has examined vide Exh. 9, Dr.

    Ashokbhai Laljibhai, who had conducted the post mortem

    report of the deceased Kailasben and son Hardik. As per the

    post mortem report, which is produced vide Exh. 14, with

    respect to the post mortem of the deceased Kailasben and

    the post mortem report of son Hardik, which is produced

    vide Exh. 15, state that the cause of death in both cases

    was asphyxia resulting from drowning.

    8.4 The complainant’s father, Mansukhbhai, has been

    examined vide Exh. 16, the mother of the deceased, Mayuben

    Mansukbhai, has been examined vide Exh. 18, and the

    brother of the deceased has been examined vide Exh. 19 as

    PW-4. In his cross-examination, he has stated that after his

    sister fell in the well, he has not gone to the village

    Chokwa, where the said incident had taken place where the

    deceased was having her matrimonial home. He has also

    admitted that he or his family members have not gone to

    the said matrimonial village of the deceased to find the

    reason, as to why the deceased had committed suicide. He

    had also stated that he has not gone to the hospital, and

    that the police had also not come to him to take his

    statement, and all the facts are stated by him for the first

    Page 7 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    time. In his cross-examination, he has also admitted that the

    deceased was having a temperament of getting emotionally

    hurt in small matters also.

    8.5 The other cousin brother of the deceased, Vijaybhai

    Babubhai, has been examined as PW-5 vide Exh. 20. He was

    the person who had received the first phone call about the

    incident, and he is the cousin of the deceased, and in his

    deposition he has only stated that he has given a general

    statement of the alleged harassment that was done on the

    deceased by the accused.

    8.6 The panchnama of the scene of offence is produced

    vide Exh. 22, and the witness to the said panchnama,

    Bharatbhai Kalubhai, has been examined vide Exh. 21 as

    PW-6. In his cross-examination, he has stated that the police

    had informed him that as the deceased was not permitted to

    go to her residence, as the accused no. 1 could not manage

    the vehicle, the deceased had committed suicide.

    8.7 The prosecution had examined Nathubhai Kalubhai,

    an independent witness examined as PW-7 vide Exh. 23. He

    was the husband of the Sarpanch of the village Chokwa. He

    has stated in his deposition that he was not present in the

    said village when he got the information about the fact that

    somebody had jumped into the well, but he was informed

    Page 8 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    about the said fact by a phone call from his son Madhubhai.

    In his cross-examination, he has stated that he has not

    heard that the deceased was harassed mentally and

    physically by the accused. Vide Exh. 24, the prosecution has

    examined Bachubhai Kalubhai as PW-8, he had called and

    informed Vijaybhai Babubhai, who has been examined at Exh.

    20, about the said incident, and in his deposition he has also

    stated that he was at village Katasar when he came to know

    about the incident that took place at village Chokwa.

    8.8 The prosecution has examined Raghavdan

    Hemubhai as PW-9, the Police Constable, vide Exh. 26, and

    the prosecution has tried to rely on the station diary of

    registration of offence, which is produced vide Exh. 32, i.e.,

    station diary no. 21/09. The intimation by the husband is

    produced vide Exh. 33, and the station diary about the

    registration of offence is produced vide Exh. 27. The

    prosecution has tried to rely on the evidence of Gordhanbhai,

    who has been examined as PW-10.

    8.9. The prosecution has also examined an independent

    witness, Savjibhai, vide Exh. 30 as PW-11, who is also a

    villager and who is of the same caste of accused. He has

    also turned hostile and not supported the case of the

    prosecution. He was alleged to be the person who had

    Page 9 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    accompanied the accused father-in-law when she was to be

    brought to the matrimonial home. The P.I Batukbhai

    Dayaljibhai has been examined as PW-12 vide Exh. 31, and

    the D.Y.S.P. Bavanji Danabhai has been examined vide Exh.

    46 as PW-15.

    8.10 If the evidence of the mother of the deceased, who

    has been examined as PW-3 vide Exh. 18, is taken into

    consideration, she has also not deposed as to what had

    transpired after the deceased had reached her matrimonial

    home from 01.03.2009 to 04.03.2009. The brother of the

    deceased has also stated the said facts vide Exh. 18 and 20.

    The cousin brother Vijaybhai, though having reached to the

    place of offence and had stated that there were other

    villagers present near the well, the prosecution has failed to

    prove as to what had transpired on the said date or in

    proximity of the same date, nor the prosecution has been

    able to prove the role of the individual accused in the said

    offence.

    8.11 Vide Exh. 33, the intimation that has been given

    by the husband also states that the deceased had committed

    suicide, as the deceased wanted to go to her house, and the

    accused no. 1 had stated that the vehicle was not available,

    as and when the vehicle would be available, they will take

    her to the house. The fact also remains that there is nothing

    Page 10 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    on record that the accused had done any act of cruelty which

    induced the deceased to end her life by committing suicide.

    8.12 The prosecution has failed to prove that the

    accused had committed the offence under Sections 306, 498A,

    and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution has also

    failed to prove that the accused had driven the deceased to

    the point of desperation, leaving her with no option except to

    think about suicide. The prosecution has also failed to prove

    any incident that had driven the deceased to commit suicide.

    Though all the witnesses relied on by the prosecution were

    the relatives of the deceased, the fact remains that even

    considering their evidence, the prosecution has failed to prove

    that the deceased had committed suicide because of the

    cruelty and harassment done by the accused.

    8.13 Moreover, even as per the post mortem report

    produced vide Exh. 14 and 15, there are no external injuries

    that have been noted in the post mortem report. The

    independent witnesses who have been examined by the

    prosecution also do not support the case of the prosecution

    that the accused had committed physical and mental cruelty

    on the deceased. It also transpires that a case under Section

    302 of the Indian Penal Code was also registered against the

    wife for throwing the child Hardik in the well, which was

    registered as FIR No. 45/2009.

    Page 11 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    9. 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 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. 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 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.

    9.1 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

    Page 12 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    9.2 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.

    9.3 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:

    Page 13 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    9.4 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.

    9.5 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

    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

    Page 14 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    9.6 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.

    9.7 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

    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

    Page 15 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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

    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,

    Page 16 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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

    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

    Page 17 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.

    10.5 The prosecution has not been able to prove that

    the abetment to commit suicide which involves a mental

    process of instigating a deceased or intentionally aiding a

    deceased in the doing of a thing without a positive proximate

    act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in

    committing suicide. There are merely allegations of

    harassment without there being any positive action proximate

    to the time of occurrence on the part of accused which led or

    compelled the deceased to commit suicide. Moreover, the word

    uttered in the heat of anger or emotion without intending

    the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be

    instigation. The prosecution has not been able to prove that

    there was active act or direct act which led the deceased to

    commit suicide seeing no other option and the prosecution

    has not been able to prove that the act of the accused was

    with the intention to push the deceased into such a position

    that he/she committed suicide.

    10.6 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

    Page 18 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    10.7 The prosecution has also not been able to prove

    the direct proximity i.e. live link between the accused action

    and victim’s death. Moreover, the prosecution has also failed

    to prove the act of alleged instigation was near the time of

    suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove any

    evidence of positive, direct act that forced a deceased into a

    situation with no other option but to take her life. The

    prosecution has not been able to prove a specific incident and

    or a recent and direct act of the accused that triggered the

    immediate 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

    Page 19 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    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
    
    
    
                                                                      Page 20 of 26
    
    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026                                          Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
                                                                                                                                         NEUTRAL CITATION
    
    
    
    
                                 R/CR.A/1967/2010                                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026
    
                                                                                                                                        undefined
    
    
    
    
                                                     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

    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

    Page 21 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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

    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

    Page 22 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    (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,
    
    
    
                                                                    Page 23 of 26
    
    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026                                       Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
                                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION
    
    
    
    
                                R/CR.A/1967/2010                                              JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026
    
                                                                                                                                undefined
    
    
    
    
    

    “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 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

    Page 24 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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 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

    Page 25 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/1967/2010 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026

    undefined

    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.

    (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
    ADITYA SINGH

    Page 26 of 26

    Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 23:39:51 IST 2026



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here