The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal against acquittal. The bench held that the oral evidence did not establish cruelty sufficient to drive the complainant to suicide. It found no merit in the appeal and concurred with the Trial Court's finding.
The criminal appeal is dismissed; the acquittal is affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 2012
[Dharamaraj Motilal Betwal Vs. Sanjay Manoharlal Gaikwad &
others]
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Mr. A.V. Bhide, Adv., for the appellant.
Mr. M.K. Pathan, APP for respondent no.5.
CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : 17th April, 2012.
1. This is an appeal against acquittal.
2. Heard.
3.The Appellant urges that it is a case where no
other conclusion than conviction could have been
possible.
4.Learned Adv., for the appellant has read out to
the Court statements of two witnesses, namely PW 2 �
Dharmaraj and PW 3 � Sumanbai, to prove the cruelty
and ill-treatment.
2
5.We have perused the statements of these
witnesses. It reveals from the version of these
witnesses that they coherently claim �she complained
that the accused - her husband and others were ill-
treating her on account of demand of amount.�
6.The description contained in the oral evidence
does not even fulfill the description of cruelty and
ill-treatment, much less it to be of such a nature and
extent that Madhuri would be driven to commit suicide.
7.The appeal is preferred on account of a
grievance against acquittal, however, the grievance
is not based on failure to take into account the
evidence or the judgment being perverse etc.
8.On perusal of evidence relied upon by the
appellant, we have reached the conclusion that the
acquittal is based on facts as borne on record. We
see that the judgment is not vitiated being perverse.
We, therefore, concur with the finding of Trial Court.
9.In the circumstances, we find no merit in the
appeal. The same is dismissed.
JudgeJudge
|Hedau|
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the acquittal of the appellant is perverse given the evidence regarding ill-treatment and demand of amount.
Whether the oral evidence established cruelty of such nature and extent that the complainant was driven to commit suicide.
Dharamaraj Motilal Betwal
Sanjay Manoharlal Gaikwad & others
A.H. Joshi
Smt. Sadhana Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court