CR.A/911/2001 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 911 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= PARESHJI VALAJI THAKORE - Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR BC DAVE for Appellant(s) : 1, MR UR BHATT, APP for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA Date : 16/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE) The appeal is preferred against judgment and order dated 8/11/2001 convicting the appellant for offences punishable under sections CR.A/911/2001 2/5 JUDGMENT 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad [Rural] at Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No. 39/2000. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 8 years for the offence punishable under section 306 and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. The appellant was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months for the offence punishable under section 498-A of the IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution against the appellant and co- accused Vajaji Dayaji, Ishaben, wife of Vajaji Dayaji and Arvind alias Govindji Vajaji Thakore, was that the appellant Pareshji was married to Sajjanben about 4 years prior to the incident. The appellant maintained illicit relations with another lady, to which his wife Sajjanben objected. Sajjanben also complained of this relationship to other accused persons, but none of the accused persons paid any heed to her objection and contrarily meted-out physical and mental cruelty to her. The appellant did not even talk to his wife Sajjanben and, therefore, on 24/7/1999 Sajjanben committed suicide by setting herself ablaze after pouring kerosene at about 9.30 a.m., at their residence at village Shertha. 3. An FIR was registered by the deceased [exh. 33] making the above allegations, on basis of which offence was registered and investigation started. During the course of investigation, dying declaration of the deceased was also recorded. The deceased, however, while under treatment, succumbed to the burn injuries and, therefore, the appellant CR.A/911/2001 3/5 JUDGMENT along with 3 others came to be charge-sheeted. 4. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Case No. 39/2000. Charge was framed at exh. 3 against the accused, to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The trial Court after considering the evidence led before it, came to the conclusion that the prosecution was successful in proving guilt of accused no. 1 – the appellant herein and recorded its conviction and imposed sentence as stated hereinabove. The Sessions Court, however, recorded acquittal in respect of the rest of the accused persons. Thus, in this connection appeal is preferred. 6. Learned advocate Mr. B C Dave represents the appellant. According to him, the conviction recorded on that evidence, on basis of which the trial Court has acquitted rest of the accused persons. He submitted that most of the witnesses have turned hostile except the parents of the deceased, who can be termed as interested witnesses. The trial Court, therefore, erred in recording conviction. 6.1. Ld. APP Mr. Bhatt has opposed this appeal. According to him, the evidence clearly implicates the appellant. Though the evidence against the appellant and acquitted accused persons was similar, there is evidence in addition to the evidence which was available against the acquitted accused and, therefore, it cannot be said that the Court has committed an error in recording conviction of the appellant on identical evidence. Mr. Bhatt submitted that there are other pieces of evidence in form of dying declarations of the deceased, which go hand-in-hand and CR.A/911/2001 4/5 JUDGMENT clearly implicate the appellant. Mr. Bhatt has drawn our attention to the fact that the appellant has already served the complete sentence and has been released from jail on 8/11/2007. The appellant was given benefit of remission by the State for a period of 2 years, 1 month and 23 days. Ld. APP therefore, submitted that the appeal may be dismissed. 7. We have taken into consideration rival side submissions. We find that the marriage life of the deceased was of about 4 years. When the deceased died, she was aged about 22 years. She has given a consistent version in form of history before the doctor, in form of the FIR [Exh. 33] and in form of dying declaration before the Executive Magistrate - Chaturbhai G. Talwadi [Exh. 17]. In all these pieces of evidence she clearly implicates the appellant. She has alleged such a nature of ill- treatment which would hurt the feelings of any lady and when the quantum of such ill-treatment becomes unbearable, she is prompted to commit suicide. Here there is clear evidence to show that the deceased committed suicide because of the treatment meted-out to her by the appellant in form of not maintaining relations with his wife and maintaining illicit relations with another woman. 7.1. It is true that some of the witnesses have turned hostile, but there is evidence in form of deposition of the parents of the deceased and they have fully supported the prosecution case. Their deposition when examined, inspires confidence and no reasons are shown to doubt the veracity of their version. Their evidence cannot be ignored, neglected or thrown over-board only because they happen to be parents of the deceased. On the contrary, their knowledge would be more authentic than CR.A/911/2001 5/5 JUDGMENT any other witness. Their version also goes parallel to the dying declaration, making it more trustworthy. 7.2. The evidence in form of dying declaration, FIR, etc., alleges ill-treatment by and quarrel with the other accused persons, but the allegation against the appellant is over and above those allegations, namely of having illicit relations and ignoring the deceased. The evidence, therefore, would be distinct so far as the two sets of accused persons are concerned. 8. In light of the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that the trial Court appreciated the evidence in proper perspective and it cannot be said that any error is committed in convicting the appellant. Appeal, therefore, must fail and stands dismissed. ( A. L. DAVE, J.) ( J .C. UPADHYAYA, J. ) *Pansala.