Gujarat High Court High Court

Sureshbhai vs Hemendrabhai on 21 January, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Sureshbhai vs Hemendrabhai on 21 January, 2010
Author: Akil Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/1225/2009	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1225 of 2009
 

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

 

SURESHBHAI
MAGANBHAI PALA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

HEMENDRABHAI
HARISHBHAI LODHIYA & 6 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
RD DAVE for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 6. 
MR
AJ SHASTRI for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. 
MS CM SHAH, APP   for
Respondent(s) :
7, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/01/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

Heard
the learned advocates appearing for the parties.

Petitioner
is the original complainant. He had initially lodged a complaint of
cruelty and dowry demand made by the relatives of his daughter due
to which allegedly his daughter had consumed acid to end her life.
Sometime thereafter, the girl died. It is the case of the
petitioner that her death was directly related to the consumption of
acid and the girl had consumed acid only for ending her life on
account of extreme mental and physical torture and cruelty meted out
to her by the accused. When the girl died, the petitioner as well as
State applied to the learned Magistrate to add sections 304(B)and 306
of the Indian Penal Code in the proceedings. This application was
turned down by the learned Magistrate. By the impugned order,
revision application filed by the petitioner as well as the State
came to be turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
observing, inter alia, that the application is premature and if at
appropriate stage on the available evidence it is found that there
is a need, charge can be altered.

Having
heard the learned advocates for the parties, I find that admittedly
the complaint was under section 498A read with section 114 of the
Indian Penal Code and under the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complaint
was filed when the daughter of the petitioner was alive. Shortly
thereafter, she expired. At this stage, it is not necessary for me
to go into the exact reason for death since the trial is yet to be
conducted. However, the victim was a young lady otherwise not stated
to be suffering from any disease. She has allegedly consumed acid
to end her life some time before her death. To my mind, these
factors were sufficient to convert the charges into those punishable
under section 304(B) read with section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned Magistrate ought to have committed the trial to the
court of Sessions before which the trial was competent.

In
the facts of the case, therefore, the impugned orders are set aside.
The learned Magistrate shall include section 304(B) and section 306
of the Indian Penal Code in the charge and shall commit the case to
the Court of Sessions for further trial. I have expressed no opinion
on the allegations and the trial shall be conducted unmindful of any
of the observations made in this order.

The
petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Akil
Kureshi, J.)

(vjn)

   

Top