Holding

The High Court upheld the trial court’s acquittal, finding no sufficient evidence to convict under Sections 498A, 304B, 306 and 114 IPC.

Summary

The State appealed the acquittal of Meraman Kara Mer and others for alleged cruelty, abetment of suicide and dowry death. The deceased, Puriben, was found dead in a well after alleged harassment by her husband for dowry. The prosecution presented oral testimonies of family members and extensive documentary evidence, but the trial court found the dowry demand and cruelty allegations unproved and dismissed the charge of dowry death. The State argued that the evidence established the essential ingredients of Sections 498A, 306 and 304B and that the presumption under Section 113A should apply. The High Court examined the evidence, held that the allegations were vague, the requisite facts were not established, and therefore found no basis to interfere with the trial court’s judgment. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the acquittal upheld.

Issues considered

Whether the prosecution proved the elements of cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
Whether the prosecution proved the elements of dowry death under Section 304B IPC.
Whether the prosecution proved abetment of suicide under Section 306 read with Section 114 IPC.
Whether the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act applies in the absence of proved foundational facts.
Whether the appellate court can set aside an acquittal under Section 378 of the CrPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 313, s. 378
Indian Evidence Act, 1872s. 113A
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 114, s. 304B, s. 306, s. 498A

Subjects

dowry deathcrueltyabetment of suicideacquittal appealevidentiary standardspresumption under Sec 113AIndian Penal CodeCriminal Procedure Code

Judgment

R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1489 of 2003

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No

==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
MERAMAN KARA MER & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JK SHAH APP for the Appellant
MR PM LAKHANI(1326) for the Respondents No. 1,2,3,4
MRS R P LAKHANI(3811) for the Respondents No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

Date : 05/01/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1. Here is the Appeal by the State against the judgment and order
of acquittal.

2. Being dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar passed in Sessions Case
No.121 of 2002, dated 31.05.2003, acquitting the respondents
from the offence under Sections 498A, 306, 304B read with

Page 1 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

Section 114 of the IPC, the State has preferred instant appeal
under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C.

3. This Court has heard Mr. J.K. Shah, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor and Mr. P.M. Lakhani, learned advocate for the
respective parties.

4. Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are that, the
respondents accused were tried and prosecuted for the charge of
cruelty, abetment of suicide and dowry death. The dead body of
deceased Puriben, who happened to be wife of the respondent
no. 1, was found in the well situated in the accuseds’ farm at
village: Kanalus. The marriage span was 8 to 9 months. The
time of death was between 27.03.2002 to 29.03.2002. The
deceased and the respondent no. 1 at the time of incident, living
separately from the family i.e. respondents. As per the
prosecution case, the husband accused was harassing the
deceased on the aspect of insufficient dowry and repeatedly
asking the deceased to bring cash amount from his father –
complainant PW-1. In such circumstances, in view of the
continuous harassment meted out to her by the accused, she
decided to end her life by jumping into the well of the farm. The
missing complaint by the husband was being lodged. According
to prosecution case, in the search process of the deceased, the
PW-1 father saw the respondent accused at the well of the farm

Page 2 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

and after seeing him, the accused ran away. He suspected
something and had carefully seen the well where he found the
dead body of the deceased. The dead body was fished out by the
village people. The Meghpar Police informed and accordingly,
the case came to be registered as accidental death. The dead
body was sent for postmortem and according to PM report, the
cause of death was aspexia on account of drawing. The PW-1
lodged an FIR on 30.03.2002, inter-alia, alleging that, the
deceased was subjected to harassment after the marriage and
she was physically and mentally harassed on the aspect of
insufficient dowry and there was a demand of cash amount from
the husband and the husband having full support from the other
family members i.e. in-laws and due to continuous harassment,
the deceased committed suicide by jumping into the well. The
accused after the registration of the offence, came to be arrested
and upon due investigation of the case, they were
chargesheeted. After committal of the case to the court of
Sessions, the charges came to be framed against the accused,
which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. In the course of trial, the prosecution adduced the following oral
as well as documentary evidence in support of its case:

Oral Evidence :

PW 1 – Exh.18 Parbat Vastabhai, Complainant
PW 2 – Exh.20 Devabhai Vastabhai Keshvala
PW 3 – Exh.21 Kariben Parbatbhai

Page 3 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

PW 4 – Exh.22 Kasam Ismail
PW 5 – Exh.23 Mukesh Heerabhai Solanki
PW 6 – Exh.27 Harbham Bhikhabhai
PW 7 – Exh.28 Leeluben Mulubhai
PW 8 – Exh.29 Kantilal Virjibhai Dukhal
PW 9 – Exh.40 Likhalal Veljibhai Rajyguru
PW 10 – Exh.42 Dr. Sunil Bipinchandra Bhatt
PW 11 – Exh.45 Rajendrakumar Jayantilal Barot

Documentary evidence :

Exh.19 Police report given by accused regarding his
missing wife
Exh.24 Panchnama of place of offence
Exh.25 Panchnama of clothes of deceased
Exh.26 Inquest panchnama
Exh.30 Report given accused regarding finding of wife
body inside well
Exh.31 Meghpar Police station additional report
Exh.32 AD message to DYSP
Exh.33 Yadi for presence of Executive Magistrate
Exh.34 Yadi fo PM
Exh.35 PM yadi and police report
Exh.36 Receipt of handing over of body
Exh.39 Complaint
Exh.41 Station diary entry no.7 copy
Exh.43 PM Note
Exh.44 Forensic Medicine Short report
Exh.46 FSL Yadi
Exh.47 Certificate
Exh.48 List of articles Yadi
Exh.49 Receipt of articles by FSL
Exh.50 Covering letter
Exh.51 FSL Report
Exh.52 Serological report
Exh.53 Yadi to Judicial magistrate F.K. Lalpur

Page 4 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

6. On conclusion of oral evidence, the trial Court recorded further
statement of the accused as provided under Section 313 of the
Code, wherein, the husband claimed that, he lodged missing
complaint in the presence of his father-in-law and there is no
custom in their community on the aspect of dowry and despite
of this, the complainant being father of the deceased, due to his
sentiment and emotional mindset, false criminal prosecution is
being initiated against him and his family members. The other
accused on the same line, put their defense. The sister-in-law, in
addition to that, stated that she married prior to the incident and
she does not have any connection with the alleged demand of
dowry and harassment.

7. The learned Sessions Judge after appreciating and examining
the oral as well as documentary evidence acquitted the accused
herein for the offences with which they were charged, on the
ground that, the allegation of demand of dowry is not proved
and so far as cruelty is concerned, the oral evidence of the
family members of the deceased is not sufficient to prove the
guilt of the accused. So far as dowry death is concerned, the
trial Court observed that, the essential ingredients of Section
304B are not proved and established.

Page 5 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this acquittal
appeal has been preferred by the State.

9. In the facts of the present case, the most of the witnesses are
family members of the deceased i.e. father, mother, sister,
uncle. There is no dispute about the span of marriage. The
deceased died due to asphexia on account of drawing and her
dead body found in the farm well, belonged to the accused
Meraman. The deceased and the husband were living separately
from his family. The witnesses namely PW-1 – Parvat Vasta,
PW-2 Deva Keshwala, PW-3 Kaliben, PW-7 Liluben, have
deposed against the accused – respondents, stating inter-alia
that, deceased was subjected to harassment as there was
constant demand of money. In such circumstances, we do not
deem it fit to refer the entire testimonies of the witnesses.

10. Mr. J.K. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
appellant – State assailing the judgment and order of acquittal,
has submitted that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law
and evidence on record and the findings recorded are palpably
erroneous and based on the irrelevant material. The trial court
failed to appreciate the facts that the death was occurred
otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of

Page 6 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

marriage and soon after the death, the deceased was subjected to
cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry. It
is boundant duty of the trial Court once the foundation facts of
the offence is proved and established, the court shall have to
presume that the alleged suicide was being abetted by the
respondents accused. Thus, it seems that, the trial court in a
mechanical manner, has failed to appreciate the evidence of the
prosecution in its true prospective and therefore, the findings of
the acquittal are seems to be contrary to the evidence on record
and palpably wrong.

11. In such circumstances, as referred above, it has been submitted
that while acquitting the respondents accused, the trial Court
has discarded and ignored the truthful, reliable and acceptable
evidence and as such, no cogent reasons being assigned while
discarding such evidence. Therefore, it is submitted that the
conclusion of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court is contrary
to the evidence on record and upon erroneous understanding of
law. Thus, it is prayed that the prosecution has succeeded in
proving the charge against the respondents accused and the
judgment and order of acquittal be set aside and accused may be
convicted and sentenced for the offence as referred above.

12. Mr. P. M. Lakhani, learned advocate appearing for the
respondents accused has submitted that the High Court in a case

Page 7 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

of Appeal against the acquittal, can interfere only when there
are compelling substantial reasons for doing so and more
particularly, the findings are without reasons and unreasonable
and contrary to the evidence. In the facts of the present case,
findings in respect of insufficient dowry and demand of further
dowry after the marriage are based on the evidence on record,
as there are general allegations of demand of cash amount and
as per the version of defense witnesses in the Mer community,
there is no custom to give dowry at the time of marriage to the
daughter. Thus, the trial Court has rightly held that, the demand
of dowry has not been established by the prosecution and the
elements of cruelty is not established against the accused.

13. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents accused, has submitted that the
Trial Court while acquitting the accused has assigned cogent
and sufficient reasons and therefore, the judgment of acquittal
passed is well reasoned, legally sustainable and does not suffer
any infirmity warranting interference by this Court.

14. Before proceeding to address the rival submissions, we would
like to place on record the scope of interference in an appeal
against the acquittal and when the same is justified. In
exceptional cases, where there are compelling circumstances
and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the
appellate court can interfere with the judgment of acquittal. The

Page 8 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

Appellate Court should bare in mind the presence of innocence
of the accused and further that, the trial Court’s acquittal
bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference in a
routine manner, where the other view of possible should be
avoided, unless there are reasons for interference.

15. In the present case the issue falls for our consideration as to
whether the trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused?

16. We have carefully examined the oral as well as documentary
evidence and perused the findings of acquittal rendered by the
Trial Court. In the facts of the present case, the deceased died
due to aspexia on account of drawing. The question for
consideration is whether the evidence adduced by the
prosecution is sufficient to prove the charge for the offences
punishable under Section 498A, 304B and 306 read with
Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code?

17. In our opinion, the witnesses examined before the trial Court
did not have specifically mentioned that on which date and
time, the deceased was physically and mentally harassed by the
husband on the aspect of demand of cash amount. The
allegations of harassment seem to be general in nature. So far as
demand of dowry is concerned, there is no custom in the

Page 9 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

community of the accused to give dowry at the time of
marriage. In such circumstances, the foundational facts to prove
the dowry death i.e. soon before the death, she was subjected to
cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry,
has not been proved and established by adducing sufficient and
admissible evidence against the accused. Unless and until, the
foundational facts are proved, the question does not arise to
invoke the presumption clause against the accused under
Section 113A of the Evidence Act. The respondent nos. 2 to 5
were living separately and as such there is no any direct
allegation that, they had demanded the dowry and on this count,
the deceased was harassed by them physically and mentally.
Thus, therefore, the view of the Trial Court as to the demand of
dowry and harassment is possible and plausible view and the
Trial Court while analyzing the evidence has assigned cogent
and sound reasons while acquitting the accused and therefore,
findings of acquittal are reasonable and based on the evidence
on record and we do not find any perversity in the findings of
acquittal so as to interfere. Thus, in our considered opinion, the
Trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused and we are in
complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and
resultant order of acquittal recorded by the Court below and
hence finds no reason to interfere with the same.

Page 10 of 11
R/CR.A/1489/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/01/2026

18. With the observations as aforesaid, the appeal is accordingly
dismissed. The Registry is directed to send back the R & P to
the Trial Court. Bail bonds are cancelled, if any, and surety is
discharged.

(ILESH J. VORA,J)

(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
P.S. JOSHI/07.01/26

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges.
Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 07/01/2026 15:53:05

Page 11 of 11