HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
RAMESH RAMJI KOLI – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-State of Gujarat under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.09.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Fast Track Court, Kachchh at Gandhidham (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Special Case No. 12 of 2006, whereby, the Trial Court has acquitted the original accused respondents herein for the offence punishable under Section 498(A), 114 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter be referred to as “the IPC”).
2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar Vs. State of Karnataka
Chandrappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka
Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
Indrasingh M. Raol vs. State of Gujarat
Kashibai & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka
M. Mohan Vs. State Represented 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 vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. 2023 Live Law (SC) 441
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 court emphasized that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide; clear evidence of intent and coercion is required.
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 ....
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.
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for compelling evidence to overturn such decisions.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC sections related to abetment of suicide.
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.