IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2600 of 2005 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-

================================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✔

================================================================

BIHARILAL ALIAS RAJU PARSHOTTAMBHAI KUNDALIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================================

Appearance:

MR YOGIN A BHAMBHANI(6444) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MS JYOTI BHATT, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 03/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-husband has challenged the judgment and order of conviction dated 19.12.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No.38 of 2005 whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Prohibition of Dowry Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to the Dowry Prohibition Act).

1.1. Under Section 498A of IPC, the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo one year of rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in the event of non-payment of fine, to undergo one month of simple imprisonment.

1.2. Under Section 306 of IPC, the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo five year of rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in the event of non-payment of fine, to undergo five months of simple imprisonment.

1.3. Under Sections 3 and 7 of the Prohibition of Dowry Act, the accused was convicted and ordered to undergo two years of simple imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in the event of non-payment of fine, to undergo three months of simple imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

1.4. The amount that was ordered to be deposited towards fine, was ordered to be kept in the name of the son of the deceased-Om Biharilal Kundaliya in a nationalized Bank in a fixed deposit till the minor attains majority.

2. The facts of the case as could be drawn from the charge Exhibit 3 in Sessions Case No.38 of 2005 which was drawn against the 9 accused states that the accused No.1 married with deceased-Rekhaben about 4 years prior. The accused No.2 was the mother-in-law while the accused No.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the sisters-in-law and the accused No.8 and 9 are the younger brother-in-law.

3. After marriage, Rekha started her matrimonial life with the accused at Dariakhan Gumat, Dudheshwar Ahmedabad and when she had joined matrimonial house with the accused, the accused would often subject her to mental and physical cruelty for trivial reasons and would often tell her that she has not brought money from her paternal house. It has also been noted in the charge that three months prior to the incident, deceased-Rekha alongwith the accused No.1 had come to stay in Nidhishree Flat, DT-3, 3^rd Floor, Motera, Taluka and District Gandhinagar. At that time, accused No.1 to 7 would often tell her to bring money from her paternal house and would mock her with regard to dowry and subject her to mental and physical cruelty.

4. On 19.03.2005, accused No.1 asked Rekha to bring money for the flat, when she refused, accused No.1 quarelled with deceased-Rekha and told her that if she was not willing to bring money from her paternal home, then she should die and thus, she got offended and as was instigated, on that day, between 2.30 to 2.45 hours, she poured kerosene on her body and ablazed herself with the use of a match stick and committed suicide. During the treatment on 20.03.2005 at about 20.45 hours, she died and thus, all the accused were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

5. The trial Court acquitted the