STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMJIBHAI RUPJIBHAI VASAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant original complainant, State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 25.8.2010 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Narmada Rajpipla, in Sessions Case No.27 of 2010. The said case was registered against the present respondents original accused for the offence under Sections 306, 498A, 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, the complainant Gambhirbhai Panchiyabhai Vasava, filed complaint before Dediyapada Police Station being C.R. No.I19 of 2010, stating that the complainant was residing at Kakunbar Village, Taluka : Dediyapada and was having one daughter viz. Lilaben, who had love affair with Valjibhai, resident of the same Village. The daughter of the complainant married with Valjibhai and was having one daughter viz. Priyanka, aged about 12 years. One year prior to the incident the family members of the Lilaben of her inlaws keeping suspect that Lilaben was having illicit relation with Harisingbhai, who was husband of Mograben, therefore accused persons were causing mental and physical harassment and were taunting her by saying, "why are you keeping relation with Harising". The deceased was beaten oftenly. Hence the complainant came to her parental home and informed about the said incident, but the complainant convinced her and sent back to her inlaws house. On 11.2.2010, the wife of the complainant came to know that Lilaben consumed poison. The complainant and his wife went to deceased's inlaws place and saw that Lilaben was unconscious and, therefore, took her to hospital where she was declared died. Hence the complaint came to be lodged.

(3.) THEREAFTER , investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested and, ultimately, chargesheet came to be filed against them in the Court of learned Magistrate. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed to the Court of Sessions.