R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 457 of 2003 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE [ENTITY] Sd/- 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see No the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the No judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as No to the interpretation of the [ACT] or any order made thereunder ? [ENTITY] Appellant(s) Versus [ENTITY] & 5 Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) Appearance: MS [ENTITY], ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ABATED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 MR [ENTITY], ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 - 5 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE [ENTITY] Date : 20/04/2015 Page 1 of 12 R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant - State Ms. [ENTITY] and learned Advocate for the respondents No.2 to 5 - Mr. [ENTITY].
2. By way of this Appeal, the Appellant
- State has felt aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.12.2002 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) in [CASE NUMBER] whereby the respondents herein were acquitted of the offences punishable under [SECTION] and [SECTION] of the [ACT].
3. The case in brief and the incident which occurred on 06.05.2002 are as under :-
It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased [ENTITY], though being a minor was forcibly engaged to an older person by the respondents herein. The accused No.2 is the grandmother of the R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT deceased, the accused No.3 is the uncle of the deceased, the accused No.4 is the wife of accused No.3 and the accused No.5 is the uncle of the deceased. All the accused are alleged to have threatened the deceased that if she would not marry as per their wishes, they would set her on fire and also they are alleged to have beaten the deceased. Hence, on the ill-fated day in the morning hours, the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene on herself and setting herself on fire. The deceased was taken to the Civil Hospital, Rajkot. Her dying declaration was recorded in the presence of the learned Executive Magistrate and the Accidental Death case was registered. A complaint was registered, the investigation commenced and the chargesheet was filed in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot under the above Sections which was registered as [CASE NUMBER]. The case was committed to the Sessions Court under Section 209 of R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT the [ACT].
The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. At the end of trial, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused of the above charges.
4. The prosecution relied on the evidences led by the witness [ENTITY] at Exhibit 9, [ENTITY] at Exhibit 10 and [ENTITY] at Exhibit 11. The prosecution also relied on various documentary evidences like the Panchnama for arrest of the accused at Exhibits 12 and 13, Inquest Panchnama at Exhibit 14, the Birth Certificate of the deceased at Exhibit 15, the Post Mortem Report at Exhibit 20 and other such documents.
5. In the above background of facts, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. [ENTITY] has submitted that the learned Judge has erred in holding that R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was below the age of 18 years. Further the learned Judge ought to have appreciated that all the accused had put pressure on the deceased and got her engaged to a person she did not want to get married. The learned Judge has further not appreciated the evidence of all the seven witnesses. Considering the above, it is submitted that this is fit case which requires the interference of the Court and the judgment and order of the learned Judge requires to be upturned.
6. Per contra, learned Advocate for the respondents No.2 to 5 Mr. [ENTITY] has submitted that no interference is called for by this Court in the well reasoned order and judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
7. At this stage, it is relevant to reproduce [SECTION] and [SECTION] of the R/[SECTION] [ACT] which reads as under :-
"305. Abetment of suicide of child or insane person - If any person under eighteen years of age, any insane person, any delirious person, any idiot, or any person in a state of intoxication, commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with death or [imprisonment for life], or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
[SECTION]. Abettor present when offence is committed. - Wherever any person, who is absent would be liable to be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence for which he would be punishable in consequence of the abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have committed such act or offence."
8. The principles which would govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court against an order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court, have been very succinctly explained by the Apex Court in catena of decisions. In a R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of [PRECEDENT], the Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases. In paragraph 16 of the said decision, the Court has observed as under :-
"16. From the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that 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 R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT 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 any of the accused is connected with the commission of the crime he is charged with."
9. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of [PRECEDENT] and in [PRECEDENT]. Thus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal are well settled.
10. Even in a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of [PRECEDENT], the Apex Court in Para-4 has held as under :-
"4. It is not in dispute that the trial Court, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT led by the prosecution and defence, acquitted the accused in respect of the charges leveled against them. On appeal by the State, the High Court, by impugned order, reversed the said decision and convicted the accused under [SECTION] of [ACT] and awarded RI for life. Since counsel for the appellants very much emphasized that the High Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in upsetting the order of acquittal into conviction, let us analyze the scope and power of the High Court in an appeal filed against the order of acquittal. This Court in a series of decisions has repeatedly laid down that as the first appellate court the High Court, even while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, was also entitled, and obliged as well, to scan through and if need be re appreciate the entire evidence, though while choosing to interfere only the court should find an absolute assurance of the guilt on the basis of the evidence on record and not merely because the High Court could take one more possible or a different view only. Except the above, where the matter of the extent and depth of consideration of the appeal is R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT concerned, no distinctions or differences in approach are envisaged in dealing with an appeal as such merely because one was against conviction or the other against an acquittal. [[PRECEDENT]]."
11. It is a settled legal position that in an acquittal appeal, the Appellate Court is not required to re-write the Judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the Appellate Court is in agreement with the reasons assigned by the trial Court acquitting the accused. On the touchstone of these judgments, the principles enunciated therein go to show that the finding of fact recorded in the said impugned judgment cannot be said to be perverse and this view is based on facts. The prosecution has failed to prove the main ingredients for bringing home the charges qua the accused.
12. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and after perusing the R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT records of the case, I am of the view that the finding of fact has been elaborately discussed by the learned Judge. It is to be noted that after the father of the deceased expired, it was the grandparents who were instrumental in bringing up [ENTITY]. They could not have wished for a bad future for the deceased. I am also of the view that no further reasons are to be assigned for arriving at the acquittal of the accused.
13. The prosecution even before this Court has not been able to dent the finding of fact to show perversity or such for which a second opinion can be taken. This Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and findings recorded by the trial Court while acquitting the accused and adopting the said reasons as well as the reasons aforesaid, in my view, the impugned Judgment is just, legal and proper and requires no interference by this Court at this stage.
R/[SECTION] JUDGMENT
14. In the above circumstances, the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.12.2002 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) in [CASE NUMBER] is confirmed.
15. The Appeal is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. Bail and bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
([ENTITY], J.) CAROLINE