Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Jesabhai Dosabhai Bhatu, the father of the deceased Nathiben alias Nitaben, filed a criminal revision application before the Gujarat High Court challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 13.10.2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.1, Jamkhambhalia in Sessions Case No.60 of 2004. The deceased was married to Dilipbhai Hamirbhai on 23.02.2004 and died within two and a half months of marriage. The complainant alleged that the in-laws were dissatisfied with the dowry brought and subjected the deceased to mental and physical cruelty, compelling her to commit suicide. It was also alleged that the dead body was cremated without post-mortem. The police registered CR No.I-60 of 2004 at Khambhaliya Police Station on 02.05.2004 against four accused persons. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. Charges were framed under Sections 498A, 306, 304B, 201 and 114 IPC. The prosecution examined 9 witnesses and relied on documentary evidence. The Trial Court acquitted the accused persons (respondents No.2 to 4) holding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court, in revision, examined the scope of revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 CrPC and found that the Trial Court's findings were not perverse. The Court noted that the prosecution witnesses gave contradictory statements regarding the alleged demand of dowry and cruelty. The presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act was not attracted as there was no evidence of any demand of dowry 'soon before death'. The Court also held that the mere fact of suicide within two and a half months of marriage, without proof of instigation, does not constitute abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. Regarding the cremation without post-mortem, the Court observed that the medical officer had opined that post-mortem was not necessary. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the revision application, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 401 - Revision against acquittal - Scope of revisional jurisdiction is limited; High Court cannot reappreciate evidence as an appellate court unless the finding is perverse or based on no evidence. (Paras 5-6) B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304B, 498A - Dowry death and cruelty - Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act, 1872 - For presumption to apply, prosecution must prove that 'soon before her death' the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand of dowry. In the present case, there was no credible evidence of any demand of dowry soon before death; hence presumption not attracted. (Paras 7-9) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Abetment to suicide - Ingredients require proof of instigation, engagement or conspiracy to commit suicide. Mere suicide within two and half months of marriage without evidence of instigation does not constitute abetment. (Para 10) D) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 201 - Causing disappearance of evidence - No evidence that accused cremated the body with intent to screen themselves from punishment; post-mortem was not mandatory as per medical opinion. (Para 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court's acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 498A, 306, 304B, 201 and 114 IPC was perverse and liable to be set aside in revision.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the revision application, upholding the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act is not automatic
- prosecution must first prove demand of dowry 'soon before death'
- Minor contradictions in witness depositions do not warrant reversal of acquittal unless perverse
- Acquittal can be based on lack of credible evidence even in serious offences
