To establish cruelty under Section 498A IPC, consistent and specific instances of harassment must be proven; vague allegations are insufficient for conviction.

JUDGMENT :

GITA GOPI, J.

1. The appellants No.1-father-in-law and appellant No.2- mother-in-law came to be convicted by the judgment and order dated 19.11.2003 by the learned Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No.50 of 2001. The trial against the appellants was under Sections 306 , 498A read with Section 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC).

2. Learned advocate Mr. M.R. Ajmeri had on an earlier date, produced the death certificate of the appellant No.1-Laljibhai Galabhai Kaklotar, who died on 22.01.2006. The death was ordered to be verified by the police. Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor tenders before this Court the Report of the Police Inspector, Rajula Police Station. The Talati cum Mantri of Dungar Gram Panchayat has addressed a communication dated 30.06.2025 to the Police Inspector, Rajula Police Station, stating therein of the death of the appellant No.1 on 22.01.2006 and also attaching the Death Certificate of the deceased. The said Report is ordered to be taken on record.

3. In view of the above, the present appeal qua the appellant No.1-Laljibhai Galabhai Kaklotar stands abated. Hence, the present appeal would be for the appellant No.2-Godavriben @ Anjwariben, wife of Laljibhai Galabhai.

4. The conviction is under Section 498A IPC where the appellant No.2-mother-in-law was ordered to undergo sentence of 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further one month simple imprisonment.

5. Learned advocate Mr. M.R. Ajmeri has submitted of illegality in not appreciating the provisions of Section 32 of the EVIDENCE ACT , 1872. The learned trial Court Judge has committed an error in relying upon the three dying declarations before three different authorities where the cause of suicide has differed. It is submitted that there is no consistency in the statement recorded of deceased-Rekhaben. It is also submitted that the Doctor who had certified the dying declaration recorded by the learned Executive Magistrate is not an authorized Doctor since he was not the treating Doctor who could give a certificate about the fit state of mind of the deceased, where the deceased had sustained 90-95% burns as per the medical statement of the PW2-Medical Officer-Dr. Ashokbhai Laljibhai Vadher. It is further submitted that there is no specific details of the fact of harassment as alleged by the deceased. The learned Judge has rightly not believed any act of abetment of suicide and therefore, has rightly acquitted both the parents-in-law under Section 306 IPC.

5.1. Learned advocate Mr. M.R. Ajmeri has submitted that the cruelty as described under Section 498A IPC has not been proved. The mother of the deceased who had deposed would have no occasion to have a talk with her daughter in the hospital. In addition, earlier also, the daughter had never stated of any harassment from the parents-in-law, to the mother of the deceased and only to create an evidence, the fact of the deceased talking with the mother on that day, during the course of hospitalization, appears to have been raised to rope in the parents-in-law in a false case. Therefore, it was urged, that the present Appeal may be allowed in favour of the appellant No.2-the mother-in-law.

6.Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohankumar Raval has submitted that the evidence of mother is crystal clear and points out the harassment from the mother-in-law to the deceased. The mother- in-law had physically injured the deceased, who had twisted the arms tw