HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
NARESHBHAI SURSINH MINA (KALASWA) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-State of Gujarat (original complainant) under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 01/05/2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Himmatnagar camp at Idar (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”) in Sessions Case No. 125 of 2008, whereby, the learned Trial Judge has acquitted the original accused respondent herein for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 306 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”).
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:
H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
Inderpal v. State of M.P. 2002 CrLJ 926
Indrasingh M. Raol vs. State of Gujarat
Kashibai & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka
M. Mohan Vs. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Mallappa v. State of Karnataka
Muralidhar v. State of Karnataka
Nipun Aneja and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar and Another
State of W.B. v. Orilal Jaiswal
Yaddanapudi Madhusudhana Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. 2023 Live Law (SC) 441
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar Vs. State of Karnataka
The court emphasized that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide; clear evidence of intent and coercion is required.
The prosecution must provide clear evidence of instigation or connection to establish charges of cruelty and abetment of suicide under IPC; mere allegations are insufficient.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in cases of acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for reliable evidence linking alleged cruelty to suicide.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence of abetment of suicide and cruelty, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof on the prosecu....
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's conduct amounted to 'cruelty' leading to the victim's suicide, which was not established in this case.
Abetment of suicide – Merely on allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on part of accused which led or compelled the person to commit sui....
Court emphasized the necessity of establishing clear evidence of cruelty to invoke presumption of abetment of suicide under Section 113A of the Evidence Act, reinforcing the presumption of innocence ....
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence is paramount, and the appellate court should not interfere unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or perverse.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC sections related to abetment of suicide.
The presumption of abetment under Section 113A of the Evidence Act does not apply automatically; the prosecution must prove cruelty to establish guilt under Sections 306 and 498A IPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.