JAWAHAR MAGHJI SINDHI BANSALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred by the appellants-convicts challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh on 6/6/2002 rendered in Sessions Case No. 149 of 1994 convicting the appellants for the offences punishable under Secs. 498-A and 306 read with Sec. 114 of Indian Penal Code directing the appellant No. 1-Jawahar Meghjibhai to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of two months for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A and to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000.00 in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months for the offence punishable under Sec. 306 and convicting appellant No. 2-Meghjibhai Hemantdas to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A and to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) In brief, prosecution case was that complainant Hemantdas, the father of deceased Draupadi lodged a complaint before police on 21st July, 1986 alleging that his daughter Draupadi aged about 18 years was married to appellant No. 1-Jawahar before about eight months of the incident. On 20th July, 1986 in the evening at about 7-50 p.m., the appellant No. 1-Jawahar informed him that Draupadi has died on account of burns. Therefore, the complainant and his son Jethanand went to the house of appellant No. 1-Jawahar and saw that Draupadi had died on an account of burns in the kitchen. It is further alleged that appellant No. 1-Jawahar was not doing any work since before two months of the incident and was demanding money for business from him (complainant). However, he did not give any money to appellant No. 1-Jawahar (son-in-law), therefore, appellant No. 1-Jawahar used to give physical and mental cruelty to his daughter. Draupadi's mother-in-law Shantaben Meghjibhai and father-in-law appellant No. 2-Meghjibhai Hemantdas were also harassing her. On the day before the incident in the morning, his daughter Draupadi came to his house and told him that her mother-in-law and present applicants have not given her food since two days and her father-in-law and mother-in-law had asked her not to go to her parent's house, but she has come on the pretext of 'darshan'. Thereby, the present appellants and mother-in-law of the deceased Draupadi were harassing his daughter and on account of such physical and mental cruelty, she was induced to commit suicide.

(3.) On the basis of the complaint, the investigation started. At the end of investigation, a charge-sheet was laid against the present appellants and mother-in-law-Shantaben. The learned Magistrate committed the case for trial to the Sessions Court. The prosecution produced death certificate of Shantaben declaring that she has died on 19-1-2000. Therefore, the case was abetted against her. Thereafter, learned Sessions Judge framed charge against the present appellants for the offences punishable under Secs. 498-A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants pleaded not guilty to the charge and demanded trial. Therefore, the prosecution adduced evidence before the trial Court. On completion of prosecution case, the further statements of the appellants were recorded under Sec. 313 of the Indian Penal Code wherein the appellants raised a defence of total denial and contended that a false case is filed against them. After hearing the oral submissions, the learned trial Judge found appellants guilty for the offences charged against them and directed them to undergo aforesaid sentence of imprisonment. The appellants have challenged this order of conviction.