STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ASHWINKUMAR MOHANBHAI THAKKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by an order of acquittal recorded on 19.12.1990 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bardoli in Criminal Case No. 1434 of 1988 wherein the accused were tried for offences punishable under Sec. 498-A read with Sec. 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Respondents were prosecuted on a First Information Report being lodged by Nitinbhai PW. 2, at Bardoli Police Station being Crime Register No. 70/88. It is disclosed in the FIR that informant Nitinbhai's younger sister Pragna @ Gita, aged about 19 years married Ashwinbhai, respondent No. 2 herein on 20.2.1988, as per the customs prevailing in the community; After marriage, she used to reside at Bardoli with her husband and Chandraben, her Mother-in-Law, while her Father-in-Law was serving as a Teacher at Batsar and was thus staying away; On 19.3.1988 Pragna, in the company of her Mother-in-Law came from Bardoli to Bombay where the informant was residing, and she stayed for a day; During her stay, she disclosed to the informant in the presence of his wife, on being questioned, that she was being ill-treated by her husband as well as her Mother-in-Law; She complained that they were torturing her very frequently on the ground that she has not brought any article in dowry; Respondent No. 3, who was ordinarily residing at United States came to India, who also tortured her in the presence of Chandraben; She was asked to bring dowry, i.e., T.V., Tape Recorder, Furniture and a sum of Rs. 15,000/- and was threatened that she will not be allowed to enter the house if she returned without dowry; She complained to him that she was mentally tired and conveyed not to tell these things to their father because on coming to know, he would be very unhappy; informant pacified Pragna and stated that as the situation improves, the articles as demanded will be given; After staying for a day, she went back to Bardoli in the company of her husband; Respondent No. 3 was also staying at the relevant time at Bardoli with respondents No. 1 and 2. 2.1 The informant has further disclosed in the complaint that on 9.4.1988 he had gone to his native place, Anjar, where on 15.4.1988, his father's sister conveyed on telephone from Bombay that Pragna has expired at Bardoli and he was asked to reach Bombay immediately; In view of this information, informant reached Bombay on 16.4.1988; On reaching home, he was conveyed information that on 14.4.1988 during night hours, for some reasons, a liquid like Kerosene was consumed by Pragna and she expired at about 4.30 a.m. in the morning on 15.4.1988. In-laws of Pragna conveyed the news in the morning of 15.4.1988 and they went to Bardoli and after cremation, they returned to Bombay. It is also stated in the complaint that Hina, daughter of elder sister of informant's father, (i.e. cousin sister) got married before about three months with Satish, son of Nirmalaben, accused No. 3 (aunt of accused No. 1). (Cousin sister of complainant happened to be the wife of cousin brother of accused No. 1). Father of the informant was threatened that if police complaint is filed, Hina will not be accepted in the family, and therefore, father did not file any police complaint; However, informant conveyed to his father what Pragna conveyed to him when she last met him at Bombay and it was clear that on account of the fact that demand for dowry was not satisfied, as alleged by the prosecution, she must have been compelled to commit suicide on account of mental torture. 2.2 On the information being lodged with police, police commenced investigation, and filed a charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bardoli for offences punishable under Secs. 498-A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Magistrate, after taking cognizance, registered the case as Criminal Case No. 1434 of 1988 and issued process. After recording the evidence and hearing the submissions, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused by judgment and order dated 19.12.1990.

(3.) Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code reads as under: 498-A. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation : For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means (a), any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or, (b) harassmet of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand. 3.1 Reading the said section, it is very clear that it refers to cruelty to which a women is subjected by husband or a relative of husband of such women. The explanation to this clause makes it very clear that a wilful conduct is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health, but this section does not deal with a situation where suicide is actually committed. Learned Magistrate, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor conducting the matter on behalf of the State and the defence counsel, all were aware about the fact that Pragna infact committed suicide within a very short span of her matrimonial life.