STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. HARESHKUMAR KHODIDAS SHRIMALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant original complainant, State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 08.06.2007 rendered by the learned Special Judge (Main Court), Gandhinagar, in Sessions Case No.17 of 2007. The said case was registered against the present respondents -original accused for the offences punishable under Sections -498A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections -3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, second marriage of the deceased -Varshaben, sister of complainant solemnized with accused No.1 -Hareshbhai Shrimali before 5 years ago from the date of incident. Accused No.2 - Khodidas Shrimali, is the father in law of the deceased Varshaben and accused No.3 -Ratnaben Khodidas Shrimali, is the mother in law of the deceased Varshaben. After the marriage, the deceased was living at her matrimonial home in joint family at Chandkheda and out of the said wedlock, they blessed with one child viz. Mit, aged about 3 years. Initially, her marriage life was running smooth. Thereafter, the respondents -accused started giving physical and mental cruelty to the deceased. The accused persons insulted and humiliated the deceased by saying "Tara Bape Shrimant Prasange Kai Apel Nathi". Prior to three years from the date of incident, she came back at her parental home and informed the complainant, her mother and father regarding the ill -treatment given by the accused persons and demanded jewelery and therefore, she was persuaded by the complainant and her parents to stay with the accused persons. Prior to two years from the date of incident, the accused persons beaten the deceased and sent her to parental home for getting gold lucky, but as the complainant was not in a position to give it, he kept his sister deceased Varshaben with him about one and half years. After settlement, complainant sent his deceased sister to her matrimonial home, but the deceased was not being treated well as accused persons continue to give physical and mental harassment to her for dowry. On 18.10.2006, when the complainant and his wife went at matrimonial home of deceased -Varshaben, to give her sweet, at that time, father in law and mother in law of the deceased quarreled with them by saying "Su Lavya Chho" Mithai Ni Jagyae Tamare Sonani Lucky Lavvi Joie" and inflicted punch blow. Thereafter, pushed the complainant outside home by saying "Tame Bhikhari Chho" Koi Dagina Laine Avvanu Te Sivay Ahi Chandkheda Avvanu Nahi", but the complainant did not utter any word and came back to home. On 19.12.2006, the complainant was informed on phone that her sister Varshaben succumbed to the burn injuries. Accordingly, complainant, his mother, her sister alongwith his village persons rushed to Chandkheda, where they came to know that dead body of the deceased shifted at Gandhinagar Civil Hospital and therefore, they went at Gandhinagar Civil Hospital where the complainant saw the deceased lying in P.M. room in burnt condition having burn injuries all over the body. Thereafter, the complainant took the possession of the dead body of his sister and performed funeral. As a result of which, the complaint was filed by the complainant against the respondents -accused before the Adalaj Police Station bearing registration No.253 of 2006 for the alleged offence stated above. Then, investigation was carried out and statements of the witnesses were recorded. Inquest Panchanam and panchama of place of offence were carried out. Dead body of the deceased was sent to the hospital for postmortem. Muddmal was recovered. Then charge -sheet was filed against the respondents -accused before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar. As the said offences were exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gandhinagar, committed the said case to the earned Special Judge (Main Court), Gandhinagar, which was numbered as Sessions Case No.17 of 2007.

(3.) ON the basis of above allegations, charge was framed vide Exh.3 and read -over and explained to the accused for the offence punishable under Sections -498A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections -3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Then, plea was recorded and respondents -accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. In support of the prosecution case, prosecution has examined four oral evidences : -