Back
2016 Supreme(Guj) 741
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R.P. Dholaria, J.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Vs.
Manojbhai Bachubhai Patel and Ors. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1242 of 1993
Decided On : 25-04-2016
For the Appellant : Rutvij Oza, APP
For the Respondents:Darshan P. Dave, Advocate
The judgment emphasizes the need for compelling reasons to interfere with an order of acquittal and highlights the importance of proper certification of the mental and physical condition of the deceased in a dying declaration.
Headnote:
Dying Declaration - Appeal of Acquittal - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378(3) - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the powers of the appellate court in appeal against an order of acquittal, emphasizing the need for compelling reasons to interfere with the finding of acquittal. The judgment referenced the principles laid down in M.S. Narayana Menon v. State of Kerala, Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, and other cases, highlighting the double presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and the requirement for manifest illegality to interfere with the trial court's decision.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Minaben, committed suicide by setting herself on fire due to alleged cruelty inflicted by her husband and mother-in-law. The prosecution relied on a dying declaration as the main evidence against the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court rightly acquitted the accused as the dying declaration lacked proper certification of the deceased's mental and physical condition at the time of recording, and the evidence did not establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The main issue was the reliability of the dying declaration as the sole evidence against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for compelling reasons to interfere with an order of acquittal and highlighted the importance of proper certification of the mental and physical condition of the deceased in a dying declaration.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the trial court's decision to acquit the accused was confirmed.
R.P. Dholaria, J.
1. This is an appeal of acquittal preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.8.1993, recorded by the City Session Judge, Ahmedabad City, in Sessions Case No. 61 of 1993.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that accused No. 1 Manoj had married one Minaben and has two sons out of the said marriage. Accused No. 1 with his wife Minaben and children was staying in the Chawl known as Ram Chawl in Khokhra Mehmedabad area, Amraiwadi, Ahmedabad. Accused No. 1 used to ply hired auto rickshaw. Since last about three years Manoj developed illicit intimacy with Savitaben, wife of Parbatsinh Thakore staying nearby. Accused No. 2-Baluben-mother of Manoj used to call Savitaben to her house and arrange her meeting with Manoj and quarrel used to take place on this issue between Minaben and Manoj and Baluben. Because of this, Manoj used to physically beat Minaben. Baluben used to say that his son Manoj would keep any number of ladies. How is she concerned? Balurben used to instigate Manoj against Minaben. On 6.10.1992, Manoj did not come to the house for supper and Minaben was waiting for him. As Manoj did not come upto 10.00 p.m. and as he was in illicit intimacy with Savitaben wife of Parbatsingh Thakore and used to remain at her house, Minaben went to the house of Savitaben and found Manoj taking dinner in the house of Savitaben and Mawas told to come to their house for supper whereupon Manoj got excited and started abusing Minabean and was given a push. Minaben returned to her house at about 10.30 p.m. She was followed by her husband Manoj and he started beating Minaben saying as to why she had come to house of Savitaben to call him. At that time, Baluben also came to their house and instigated Manoj to beat Minaben. Thereafter she left for her house at about 10.45 p.m. Due to permanent harassment of her husband and mother-in-law and the mental and physical cruelty inflicted on her by them she poured kerosene on her body and set fire with match-stick to her clothes. Thereafter her husband and other people from neighborhood tried to extinguish fire by putting quilt on her. One Jagdishbhai Ishvarbhai Patel brought her to L.G. Hospital for treatment of burn injuries sustained by her in the incident. On 16.10.1992 at about 7:00 a.m., Minaben succumbed to the injuries received by her in the incident of 6.10.1992.
3. In pursuance of the aforesaid complaint, the Police recorded statement of complainant and other witnesses and after completion of investigation, filed chargesheet which came to be committed to the learned Sessions Judge and learned Additional Sessions Judge after conclusion of trial and hearing, acquitted the accused from all the charges levelled against them. Therefore, the present appeal.
4. Heard Mr. Darshan P Dave, learned advocate for the respondent-accused and Mr. Rutvinj Oza, learned APP for the State.
5. At the out set, it is required to be noted that during pendency of this appeal, respondent No. 2-Baluben died. Consequently therefore, appeal against respondent No. 2 is abated vide order dated 8.12.2015 by this Court. In that view of the matter, the appeal is heard against the sole respondent-Manoj.
6. Mr. Rutviz Oza, learned APP has argued that though the dying declaration at Exh:17 is on record, the trial Court has failed to appreciate its evidentiary value in its proper perspective and has wrongly recorded the order of acquittal which requires to be reversed as such. He has further argued that prior to recording, the aforesaid dying declaration, Yadi was sent to the Executive Magistrate wherein endorsement containing that the patient is in conscious, is made. In that view of the matter, when her dying declaration recorded, she was in a fit condition. He has further argued that there are some other corroborative evidence available relying upon the same, which has been overlooked as such by the learned tr
