ISMAILBHAI YAKUBBHAI KHEDAWALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeals assail the judgment and order 03/06/1996 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 282 of 1994, whereby, while acquitting the original accused for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC'), the learned trial Judge was pleased to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498 -A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 500/ - each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further imprisonment for three months. For the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further rigorous imprisonment for five months. The sentences were to run concurrently. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 445 of 1996 has been filed by the original accused No. 1 against conviction whereas, Criminal Appeal No. 618 of 1996 has been filed by the State against acquittal of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) of the IPC.

(2.) FILTERING the unnecessary details, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 18/06/1994 in the evening, deceased Rasidabibi, the wife of the accused No. 1, committed suicide having become unbearable the physical and mental torture being given by the accused on the count dowry by jumping into Sabarmati river with her daughter, for which, a complaint came to be lodged against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 306, 498(A).

(3.) WE have examined the matter carefully and gone through the evidence on record. Taking into consideration the fact that the accused No. 1 has already undergone the sentence imposed upon, the appeal filed by him having become academic, the same deserves to be disposed of accordingly. So far as Criminal Appeal No. 618 of 1996 filed by the State against acquittal of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) of the IPC is concerned, having gone through the evidence on record and the observations made by the learned trial Judge, we are in complete agreement with the reasonings given and the findings arrived at by the trial Court and therefore, we are not inclined to disturb the same.