Back
2020 Supreme(Guj) 284
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.P. THAKER, J.
Rameshbhai Chanabhai Rojasra and Others – Appellants
Versus
The State of Gujarat – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 286, 1563 of 2005
Decided On : 06-03-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. S.B. Tolia, Mr. Harshit S. Tolia.
For the Respondent: Ms. Maithili Mehta.
Point of Law:
The appellant no. 1 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. For a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- in default, he is directed to suffer R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable u/s. 498-A of I.P.C. Further, the appellant No. 1 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, he is directed to suffer R.I. for 1 year for the offence punishable u/s. 306 of I.P.C.
Headnote:
Indian Procedure Code - Section 306 - Appeal aggrieved and dissatisfied with judgment and order of conviction and sentence - Fast Track Court - Accused have preferred Criminal Appeal against their conviction and sentence State Government has preferred Criminal Appeal for enhancement of sentence imposed upon accused - Appellant has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. For a period of years and to pay a fine directed to suffer R.I. for months for offence punishable - Further appellant has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of years and to pay a fine of in default is directed to suffer for year for offence punishable - Held, Court case of prosecution that marriage of deceased with accused was solemnized one year prior to date of incident - It is alleged that there was constant quarrel prior to one month of incident and on date of incident deceased was treated with physical and mental cruelty by accused - Court is also alleged that accused had illicit relation with deceased - According to prosecution case due to this illicit relationship there was quarrel between accused and deceased due to which went to her parental home - Court is alleged that thereafter deceased was persuaded and was brought back to her matrimonial home - Impugned judgment and order of Trial Court it clearly transpires that has not properly appreciated evidence on record and has merely relied on version of witnesses reflected in chief-examination prosecution - Trial Court has not considered revealed from cross-examination also - Therefore approach adopted by Trial Court is not in consonance with well settled principles of law and Trial Court has committed serious error of and law in convicting accused and imposing sentence upon them - Therefore impugned judgment and order - Appeal allowed (Para 44)
Facts of the Case:
Incident has happened on 15.02.2001 at about 7.00 pm at the house of accused No. 1 in Rajkot city. In the said incident, wife of accused No. 1 and daughter-in-law of accused No. 2 namely Kailashben sustained burn injuries and ultimately, she died on 06.03.2001. Accused No. 3 Shardaben is the wife of Ashwinbhai who is elder brother of accused No. 1.
Finding of the Court:
Court case of prosecution that marriage of deceased with accused was solemnized one year prior to date of incident - It is alleged that there was constant quarrel prior to one month of incident and on date of incident deceased was treated with physical and mental cruelty by accused - Court is also alleged that accused had illicit relation with deceased - According to prosecution case due to this illicit relationship there was quarrel between accused and deceased due to which went to her parental home - Court is alleged that thereafter deceased was persuaded and was brought back to her matrimonial home - Impugned judgment and order of Trial Court it clearly transpires that has not properly appreciated evidence on record and has merely relied on version of witnesses reflected in chief-examination prosecution - Trial Court has not considered revealed from cross-examination also - Therefore approach adopted by Trial Court is not in consonance with well settled principles of law and Trial Court has committed serious error of and law in convicting accused and imposing sentence upon them - Therefore impugned judgment and order.
Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT :
A.P. THAKER, J.
1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 28.01.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2001 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Trial Court”) the accused have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 286 of 2005 against their conviction and sentence, whereas, the State Government has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1563 of 2005 for enhancement of sentence imposed upon the accused.
2. By impugned judgment and order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Rajkot has convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code as under:
“The appellant no. 1 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. For a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- in default, he is directed to suffer R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable u/s. 498-A of I.P.C. Further, the appellant No. 1 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, he is directed to suffer R.I. for 1 year for the offence punishable u/s. 306 of I.P.C.
The appellant no. 2 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default, she is directed to suffer R.I. for 3 months for the offence punishable u/s. 498-A of I.P.C. Further, the appellant No. 2 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default, she is directed to suffer R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable u/s. 306 of I.P.C.
The appellant no. 3 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default, she is directed to suffer R.I. For 3 months for the offence punishable u/s. 498-A of I.P.C. Further, the appellant no. 3 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default, she is directed to suffer R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable u/s. 306 of I.P.C.”
3. As both these criminal appeals having been arise from the same judgment and order, these appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
4. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under.
4.1 According to the prosecution case, the incident has happened on 15.02.2001 at about 7.00 pm at the house of accused No. 1 in Rajkot city. In the said incident, wife of accused No. 1 and daughter-in-law of accused No. 2 namely Kailashben sustained burn injuries and ultimately, she died on 06.03.2001. Accused No. 3 Shardaben is the wife of Ashwinbhai who is elder brother of accused No. 1.
4.2 It is the case of the prosecution that the marriage of deceased Kailashben with accused No. 1 was solemnized one year prior to the date of incident. It is alleged that there was constant quarrel prior to one month of the incident and on the date of the incident, deceased was treated with physical and mental cruelty by the accused. It is also alleged that accused No. 1 had illicit relation with accused No. 3 Shardaben i.e. Jethani of deceased Kailashben. According to the prosecution case, due to this illicit relationship, there was quarrel between accused No. 1 and deceased Kailashben, due to which, she went to her parental home. It is alleged that thereafter, the deceased was persuaded and she was brought back to her matrimonial home.
4.3 It is the case of the prosecution that on the day of incident, there was marriage ceremony of son of aunt (faiba) of accused No. 1. It is alleged that accused No. 1 has not taken the deceased with him and the quarrel took place between them and accused No. 1 alone went in the marriage ceremony. It is alleged that thereafter, the deceased went to her parental home during noon hours and she returned back at ab
