STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. HARIPRASAD RAMESHPRASAD SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.05.1995, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No.106/1994, whereby respondents Nos.1 to 4 (original accused) have been acquitted of the charges under Sections-498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the case of the prosecution, based upon the complaint dated 27.01.1994 (Exhibit- 13), filed by Surajprasad Chhedalal Dixit, father of deceased Manjula (the deceased) is as follows:

(3.) MR . H.K. Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the impugned judgment and order of the Trial Court suffers from grave error as the evidence on record has not been appreciated in proper perspective. It is submitted that it is clear from the evidence of the complainant, PW-2-brother of the deceased, PW-3-sister of the deceased and PW-4 sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the deceased that the deceased had herself disclosed to them that the accused used to harass her for not bringing certain dowry items such as, a Tape Recorder, Gold Chain and Gold Ring. It is further stated that it emerges from the evidence of the brother, sister and sister-in-law of the deceased that the accused were pressurising the deceased to bring an amount of Rs.10,000/- from her parental home, for the marriage of accused No.4. That there is sufficient evidence on record to indicate that the deceased was being tortured by the accused, which has been stated by all the prosecution witnesses. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further submitted that the span of marriage of the deceased and respondent No.1 was only seven months, therefore, a presumption under Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act,1872, would arise. That the Trial Court has disbelieved the version of the prosecution witnesses only on the ground of contradictions but has failed to examine the evidence in proper perspective. On the above grounds, it is submitted that the appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment and order quashed and set aside.