STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. DILIPBHAI RAMJIBHAI RAVAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the applicant State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.9.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Arvalii at Modasa in Sessions Case No.35 of 2015 (Old Sessions Case No.58 of 2010), whereby the respondents herein have been acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 498A , 304B and 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

(2.) The first informant Balubhai Shakraji Rathod lodged a complaint before Bhiloda Police Station on 1.4.2009 stating that his daughter Kalpanaben was married to Dilipbhai Ramjibhai Raval of Raisingpura village in the year 2004 and out of the wedlock a daughter was born who was about 7 years of age at the time of the incident. On 1.4.2009 he had gone for the purpose of social work to Dediyavada village and from there he went to meet his daughter at her in-laws' house at Raisingpura at 5:30 in the evening and his wife Shantaben had also accompanied him. At his daughter's place, his daughter's father-in-law Ramjibhai Thavarji Raval was sitting in the courtyard on the veranda and his son-in-law and his daughter's mother-in-law were not present. Adivasis had gathered in front of their house. His daughter's sister-in-law Kamlaben was present and other persons had also gathered there. Upon asking his daughter's father-in-law as well as sister-in-law about his daughter, they had informed him that as his daughter Kalpanaben was not well, her husband Dilip and her mother-in-law Surajben had taken her to the hospital. According to the informant, from the expressions on their face it appeared that they were trying to conceal something, and hence, he and his wife inquired from the people, who had gathered there and came to know that Kalpanaben had consumed poison, therefore, people had gathered there. Upon ascertaining further, he and his wife came to know that on the previous night her daughter's mother-in-law, father-in-law and husband Dilip had beaten her up badly. He has further stated that his son-in-law was not earning anything and time and again, he used to pressurize his daughter to bring household articles from the informant, and since it was beyond his (the informant's) means his daughter used to oppose, and hence, time and again he used to beat her. These facts had been told by his daughter on several occasions. However, with a view to see that her married life is not spoiled, they used to try to satisfy the demands made by her in-laws. The informant has further stated that thereafter he and his wife Shantaben went home and after coming with their family members to his daughter's house, they found that his daughter's corpse was lying in open courtyard. Her face was covered and her family members had gone somewhere. Thus, in connection with the demands of dowry made on his daughter, her husband Dilip as well as mother-in-law Suraj, father-in-law Ramjibhai, had subjected her to mental and physical cruelty and compelled her to die and thus, all the accused had come together and fulfilled their common intention.

(3.) Pursuant to the above complaint, a first information report came to be registered being Bhiloda Police Station Crime Register No.I-29 of 2009. Upon registration of the first information report, the Investigating Officer carried out investigation and upon finding sufficient material against the accused, he submitted a charge sheet in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Bhiloda, where it was registered as Criminal Case No.585 of 2009. Since the case was exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court at Modasa, where it came to be registered as Sessions Case No.35 of 2015.