Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
S.V. PINTO
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Vanrajsinh Bahadursinh Parmar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Criminal Appeal No. 1483 of 2008 has been filed by the appellant - State against the respondents - original accused nos. 1 and 2 of Sessions Case No. 62 of 2006 and Criminal Appeal No. 1484 of 2008 has been filed by the appellant - State against the respondents - original accused nos. 1 and 2 of Sessions Case No. 63 of 2006 under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the common judgement and order of acquittal passed on 16.02.2008 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 7, Gondal, Camp at Dhoraji, (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”).
1.1 Both the Sessions Cases arose out of the same FIR registered with PatanVav Police Station I – C.R. No. 43 of 2004 under Sections 306 and 114 of the IPC, wherein, the respondents of Criminal Appeal No. 1483 of 2008 were shown as accused nos. 1 and 2 and the respondents of Criminal Appeal No. 1484 of 2008 were shown as original accused nos. 3 and 4.
1.2 As both the Sessions Cases had risen out of the same FIR and separate chargesheets were filed, both the cases were consolidated by the learned Trial Court and the accused were referred to in the rank and
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or incitement to suicide is essential; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
The court emphasized that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC Sections 306 and 498-A; clear evidence of instigation is necessary.
To establish abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, clear evidence of instigation or incitement is required, which was not proven in this case.
In appeals against acquittal, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide.
In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if the trial court's decision is perverse or lacks evidence.
In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if the trial court's judgment is perverse or lacks proper reasoning.
In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if there is clear evidence of illegality or perverse reasoning in the trial court's judg....
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence, emphasizing that an acquittal should not be overturned without compelling evidence demonstrating guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
For abetment of suicide under IPC, clear evidence of instigation or harassment is essential; mere allegations are insufficient.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
