STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. LIRIBEN MAKAN SAMANT KUCHNHADIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above referred Criminal Appeal is preferred under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 20th September, 2004, delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 8th Fast Track Court at Porbandar in Sessions Case No.15 of 2003, whereby, the present respondents, being accused of the Sessions Case, came to be acquitted by the trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as well as for offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) According to prosecution case, the deceased of the incident is one Liluben alias Jiviben, wife of Virambhai Makanbhai Kuchadia. She had married to Virambhai before about seven years of the incident. The respondent No.1 Liriben Makanbhai Kuchadia was her mother-in-law while the respondent No.2 Parbatbhai Makanbhai Kuchadia happened to be the younger brother of her husband. According to prosecution case, during her married life, she was treated with cruelty by the respondents and allegations were made against her by respondents about her character as well. On 12th July, 2002, at about 3:00 p.m., in the Sim of village Kuchadi, both the respondents abused the deceased Liluben and inflicted injuries by stick. On account of this, on 14th July, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., she poured kerosene on her body at her house at village Kuchadi and set herself ablaze. She was thereafter admitted to Government Hospital at Porbandar and she gave her complaint before PSI, Kamalbaug Police Station and the same was registered at Kamlabaug Police Station vide zero number and thereafter it was forwarded to Bagvadar Police Station where crime came to be registered as I-C.R.No.90/2002. The investigation was handed over to PSI Mr.V.N.Chauhan and thereafter to Dy.S.P. Shri Mothalia and from him to Mr.Rameshbhai Fulabhai Sanghala. Ultimately, chargesheet came to be filed against the respondents in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Porbandar which was registered as Criminal Case No.6700 of 2002 and the said case came to be committed to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as Sessions Case No.15/2003.

(3.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge, 8th Fast Track Court, Porbandar, framed Charge against both the respondents vide Ex.5 on 6th January 2004, to which both the respondents pleaded not guilty. The prosecution therefore examined as many as sixteen witnesses and produced on record, voluminous documentary evidence to prove its case. Thereafter, the learned trial Judge recorded the statements of the respondents under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code wherein the respondent No.1, after denying the evidence of the prosecution, further stated that Virambhai (husband of the deceased) and deceased were staying separately from them and away from their house before three years from date of the incident and he and respondent No.2 had not committed any cruelty upon the deceased. On the contrary, as soon as they came to know about the incident, the deceased was taken to hospital immediately and her parents were called. She was wholly burnt and was not in a position to speak. From the said marriage, the deceased had two children and they were with them and they were taking proper care of the two minor children of the deceased.