2021 Supreme(SC) 473

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. Abdul Nazeer, Krishna Murari, JJ.
Gumansinh @ Lalo @ Raju Bhikhabhai Chauhan & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
The State Of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 940-941 OF 2021 Arising Out Of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 2860-2861 OF 2019
Decided On : 03-09-2021

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) There is nothing unnatural for a victim of domestic cruelty to share her trauma with her parents, brothers and sisters and other such close relatives. Evidentiary value of close relatives/interested witness is not liable to be rejected on the ground of being a relative of deceased.
(2) Law does not disqualify the relatives to be produced as a witness though they may be interested witness.
(3) If evidence of any interested witness/relative on a careful scrutiny by Court is found to be consistent and trust-worthy, free from infirmities or any embellishment that inspires confidence of Court, there is no reason not to place reliance on the same.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 306 and 498A read with Section 114 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 113-A – Cruelty and abetment of suicide – Conviction and sentence – Suicidal death of deceased occurred within a short span of eight months of marriage – There was not even a suggestion by defence that deceased was suffering from any kind of mental illness or undergoing treatment for the same – Deceased lived in her matrimonial home with appellants for about eight months after marriage and if she was undergoing any prolonged treatment, it was not possible for appellants not to have acquired knowledge of said facts – Most often offence of subjecting married woman to cruelty is committed within boundaries of house which in itself diminishes chances of availability of any independent witness and even if an independent witness is available whether he or she would be willing to be a witness in the case is also a big question because normally no independent or unconnected person would prefer to become a witness for a number of reasons – There is nothing unnatural for a victim of domestic cruelty to share her trauma with her parents, brothers and sisters and other such close relatives – Evidentiary value of close relatives/interested witness is not liable to be rejected on the ground of being a relative of deceased – Law does not disqualify the relatives to be produced as a witness though they may be interested witness. (Paras 13, 17, 19 and 21)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 306 and 498A read with Section 114 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 113-A – Cruelty and abetment of suicide – Conviction and sentence – PWs, though they are related to deceased, are natural witnesses – There being no bar in examining family members or any other person as witnesses, their evidence is not liable to be discarded on this ground – Evidence of witnesses is consistent without any material contradiction and inspires confidence – Courts below have also properly scrutinized their evidence prior to taking them into account and there is nothing unusual in believing their testimonies – Prosecution has proved that deceased was harassed with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand of Rs.25,000/- and such harassment was on account of failure by her to bring the amount from her father who was financially incapable to meet such demand – Prosecution has been successful in proving charge of cruelty under Explanation (b) of Section 498-A IPC – Suicidal death by consuming pesticide stands affirmed by evidence of Doctor – However, prosecution failed to adduce any direct evidence to establish that accused abetted deceased into committing suicide – Deceased committed suicide within a period of seven years from date of her marriage and charged-accused had subjected her to cruelty – Evidence clearly establishes offence of cruelty or harassment caused to deceased and foundation for presumption exists – Appellants have led no evidence to rebut the presumption – Courts below committed no illegality in holding that accused-appellants abetted suicide of deceased – Prosecution was successful in establishing charge under Section 498-A of cruelty against appellants from which a reasonable inference can be drawn that deceased committed suicide by consuming pesticides – Deceased was in custody of appellant and died within four walls of her matrimonial home under suspicious circumstances – Not only a specific charge was framed against accused-appellants, on one hand, defence failed to adduce any evidence to rebut presumption under Section 113-A and on other hand prosecution was successful in establishing evidence that deceased was left with no choice than to commit suicide – No reason to interfere with impugned judgment – Appeals dismissed. (Paras 24, 25, 26, 28, 33, 37, 38, 44 and 47)

(C) Criminal Law – Appreciation of evidence – When Court has to appreciate evidence of any interested witness it has to be very cautious in weighing their evidence – Evidence of an interested witness requires a scrutiny with utmost care and caution – Court is required to address itself whether there are any infirmities in evidence of such a witness; whether evidence is reliable, trust-worthy and inspires confidence of Court – Another important aspect to be considered while analyzing evidence of interested witness is whether genesis of crime unfolded by such evidence is probable or not – If evidence of any interested witness/relative on a careful scrutiny by Court is found to be consistent and trust-worthy, free from infirmities or any embellishment that inspires confidence of Court, there is no reason not to place reliance on the same. (Para 22)

Facts of the case:

Present appeals arise out of final order and judgment of High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dated 28.12.2018 corrected vide order dated 08.02.2019 in R/Criminal Appeal No. 833 of 2000 and final order and judgment dated 07.03.2019 in Criminal Misc. Application (for extension of time) No. 1 of 2019 filed by the appellants challenging the order of conviction against them. By said judgment, the High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by appellant herein challenging the judgment dated 27.07.2000 passed by Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 92 of 1998 convicting appellant in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498A read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code is confirmed.

Findings of Court:

Both the Trial Court as well as the High Court have threadbare considered evidence and have recorded cogent reasons to come to the conclusion that prosecution has been successful in proving the case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt.

Result : Appeals dismissed.