DILIPKUMAR B PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No.157 of 1993 on 17th January, 1994. Three accused persons were tried for the offence punishable under Section 306 and 498 (A) of the Indian Penal code. The original accused No.2 and accused No.3 was father and mother of the present appellant respectively. The appellant was husband of the deceased-Rekha. However, the learned trial Judge has acquitted the original accused Nos.2 and 3 from the charges levelled against them. The respondent-State of Gujarat has preferred the acquittal appeal against two accused persons being Criminal Appeal No.616 of 1994. The Court is informed by Mr.Shah, learned Counsel for the appellant that the said acquittal appeal was taken up for hearing and dismissed vide judgment and order dated 23/07/1996.

(2.) Mr.Shah, has taken this Court through the evidence led by prosecution, so also, through the judgment and order under challenge. The judgment and order is assailed on various grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal. It is submitted that the learned trial Judge has committed grave error in appreciating the evidence led by prosecution to prove the alleged cruelty and the act of abetment to commit suicide which is punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) On the other hand say of learned A.P.P., Ms.Pandit is that the learned trial Judge has assigned various reasons and has recorded its own finding. A detailed discussion has also been made as to why the version of the complainant should be believed and as to why certain answers given by the Panch Witness favouring the defence plea should not be given weightage. No good reasons are coming forth which can explain the act of suicide. If deceased-Rekha was feeling frustration then also it was the direct result of the ill-treatment given by the accused persons and mainly the present appellant. In short, the learned A.P.P., has made detailed submissions for dismissal of the present appeal.