THAKOR BHIKHAJI CHHAGANJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal assails the judgment and order dated 17/05/2011, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Patan, in Sessions Case No. 5 of 2009, whereby, while acquitting the original accused Nos. 2 and 3 from all the charges and the present appellant - original accused No. 1 from the charge of offence punishable under Section 323, 306 r/w. 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC'), the appellant - original accused No. 1 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for two years and a fine of Rs.1,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment (SI) for fifteen days. He was given benefit of set off. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as per their original status.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that prior to about three years of 23/09/2008, marriage of the accused No. 1 and deceased Ramilaben was solemnized. The original accused Nos. 2 and 3 were the parents in -laws of the deceased. It was alleged that, after the marriage, all the accused, in aid and abetment of each other, used to taunting the deceased as to she had not brought anything from her parents and she was asked to bring Rs.2,000/ -, which were though given, the accused did not rest and continued to taunting and physically and mentally harassing the deceased. Prior to the incident in question also, the deceased was expelled from the house after beating, asking her to bring Rs.5,000/ - from her parents for running a pan -bidi galla, which led the deceased to commit suicide by strangulation. Thus, the accused committed the offence alleged against them for which, a complaint for the offences punishable under sections 498 -A, 306 r/w. 114, 323 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, came to be lodged against them. 2.1 Pursuant to the complaint, investigation was carried out. After investigation, charge -sheet was filed and as the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Sessions Court. The trial Court framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution produced oral as well as documentary evidence. In order to bring home the charge against the original accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses and produced following documentary evidence. 2.2 At the end of the trial, Further Statements of the accused under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, 'the Code') were recorded in which they denied the evidence forthcoming on the record and stated that a false case has been filed against them. Thus, after recording above -referred Further Statements and hearing the arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge came to the aforesaid conclusion by the impugned judgment and order, giving rise to prefer the present appeal by the accused No. 1.

(3.) Heard Mr. Yogendra Thakore, the learned advocate for the appellant - original accused No. 1 and Ms. Reeta Chandarana, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent - State.