The Gujarat High Court set aside the man’s conviction for cruelty and abetment, stating that a single incident of slapping his wife for staying at her parental home without informing was not cruelty while acquitting him in law.
The Gujarat High Court set-aside the conviction of a man accused of subjecting his wife to cruelty and abetting her suicide.
The court ruled that typical domestic disputes regarding a husband’s late working hours and a single incident of slapping do not meet the threshold for cruelty under Section 498A or abetment under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Justice Gita Gopi, in her ruling, stated that without a deliberate action aimed at pushing the deceased toward suicide, a conviction cannot be upheld.
Senior Counsel Mr. Dhaval Vyas, representing appellant Dilipbhai, argued that the trial court did not properly assess the evidence according to the principles of criminal law. He maintained that the harassment claims were vague, primarily revolving around minor domestic disagreements.
The defense noted that Dilipbhai, who worked at GIDC, also played the banjo at musical events to supplement his income, which led to disagreements with his wife about his late hours.
He contended that such marital disputes do not fall under cruelty as defined in Section 498A, and there was no mens rea (criminal intent) or sufficient cause to demonstrate “instigation” under Section 306 IPC. Furthermore, he emphasized that there were no dowry demands involved.
On the other hand, Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Ms. Jyoti Bhatt defended the trial court’s conviction, claiming the appellant’s behavior was suspicious. She pointed out that when searching for his missing wife, he first went to a neighbor instead of his in-laws, and mentioned that he had asked the deceased’s brother to return the kanyadaan articles.
The APP cited the testimony of the deceased’s mother, who alleged that she had witnessed the appellant physically assault her daughter.
The court evaluated the medical evidence presented by Dr. Arvindbhai Muljibhai Gori, who determined that asphyxia due to hanging was the cause of death. The autopsy indicated that the deceased’s hyoid bone remained intact. Quoting forensic literature, the court indicated that homicidal hanging is extremely rare, typically involving fractures of the larynx or hyoid bone, thereby dismissing the parents’ suspicions of murder.
In assessing the testimonies of the deceased’s parents, the court referenced a Supreme Court ruling stating that while evidence from close relatives is admissible, it must be examined with utmost care and caution to ensure its credibility and accuracy.
The court found that the prosecution’s evidence did not demonstrate sustained, severe harassment. It identified that the main issue in the marriage was the wife’s dissatisfaction with her husband’s late-night returns after playing the banjo.
The court addressed a specific claim where Dilipbhai allegedly slapped Premila for staying overnight at her parental home without informing him, asserting,
“One incident of husband slapping the wife on the ground of staying overnight at parental home without informing him would not be counted as cruelty.”
Citing Supreme Court precedent, the court emphasized that the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is unaffected by the provisions of Section 498A IPC or the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act.
It also noted that the mere fact of a woman committing suicide within seven years of marriage does not automatically suggest abetment; the cruelty’s nature must genuinely have the potential to drive her to such an act.
Quoting M. Mohan v. State regarding Section 306 IPC, the court stated,
“Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.”
In concluding its examination of the evidence, the court declared,
“The proximate cause to suicide was not proved. And persistent, unbearable continuous beatings would require cogent evidence to be considered as proved, for the same to be believed as cruelty that drove the daughter to commit suicide by hanging herself to death finding no other alternative.”
The appellant, Dilipbhai Manglabhai Varli, was married to the deceased, Premila, for about a year before her death on May 11, 1996. She was found hanging from a tree in the appellant’s field.
Following a police probe, Dilipbhai faced charges of causing mental and physical cruelty and driving his wife to suicide. On May 20, 2003, he was convicted by the District Judge in Valsad, receiving a one-year sentence and a fine of Rs. 100 for the Section 498A IPC offense, and a seven-year sentence with a Rs. 500 fine under Section 306 IPC.
He subsequently appealed the conviction to the Gujarat High Court.
The High Court concluded that the witnesses did not sufficiently substantiate the claims of cruelty and abetment of suicide, thus deeming the trial court’s judgment flawed.
Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, overturned the May 20, 2003 ruling by the District Judge in Valsad, and acquitted the appellant of all charges.
Case Title: Dilipbhai Manglabhai Varli vs State of Gujarat
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
