Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sindhubai Dilip Patel, the mother of the deceased Nital, filed a criminal appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the acquittal of respondent No.1 Rajesh Ashok Patil (husband) and respondent No.6 Hemant Rajaram Jadhav by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, in Sessions Case No. 8 of 2015 dated 07.05.2022. The accused were acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 306, 498-A, and 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The marriage of Nital with Rajesh was solemnized four months prior to the incident. The deceased started cohabiting with her husband in a joint family. Initially, relations were cordial, but about two months before the FIR, Nital made a phone call to her son Dinesh complaining of ill-treatment. She also disclosed to the informant about a demand for money by her husband, who had received a message to pay money or send his wife to the sender. The informant persuaded her and sent her back. Later, the deceased was taken to her parental home for rest due to pregnancy, and on 03.09.2014, her father-in-law and mother-in-law took her back. However, the informant received a phone call that Nital had committed suicide by hanging. The trial court acquitted the accused, leading to this appeal. The High Court heard the appellant's counsel and the APP. The court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove any demand of dowry soon before the death, as required under Section 304-B IPC. The alleged demand of money was not established as a dowry demand. The evidence of cruelty under Section 498-A was vague and based on hearsay. There was no evidence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. The trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and were not perverse. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal against acquittal - Section 372 CrPC - Informant's appeal - The appellant-informant challenged acquittal of accused under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 306 IPC. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and not perverse. The appeal was dismissed as no interference was warranted. (Paras 1-11) B) Indian Penal Code - Dowry death - Section 304-B IPC - Demand of dowry soon before death - The prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before her death. The alleged demand of money was not proved to be a dowry demand. The acquittal was upheld. (Paras 3-10) C) Indian Penal Code - Cruelty by husband or relatives - Section 498-A IPC - The evidence of ill-treatment was vague and not corroborated. The deceased's phone call to her son about ill-treatment was hearsay. The acquittal was upheld. (Paras 3-10) D) Indian Penal Code - Abetment to suicide - Section 306 IPC - No evidence of instigation or active abetment to commit suicide. The deceased's suicide was not linked to any act of the accused. The acquittal was upheld. (Paras 3-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused under Sections 304-B, 498-A, and 306 IPC was perverse and liable to be set aside in an appeal by the informant under Section 372 CrPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The acquittal of respondent No.1 Rajesh Ashok Patil and respondent No.6 Hemant Rajaram Jadhav is upheld.
Law Points
- Section 304-B IPC requires proof of demand of dowry soon before death
- Section 498-A IPC requires proof of cruelty or harassment
- Section 306 IPC requires proof of abetment to suicide
- Acquittal appeal under Section 372 CrPC limited to questions of law or fact
