Writ Jurisdiction Not Appropriate For Adjudicating Complex Title Disputes; Mutation Entries Do Not Confer Ownership: Madhya Pradesh High Court Joint Account Holder Not Liable Under Section 138 NI Act If Not A Signatory To Dishonoured Cheque: Allahabad High Court Private Individuals Accepting Money Can Be Prosecuted Under MPID Act; Nomenclature As 'Loan' Irrelevant: Supreme Court Nomenclature Of Transaction As 'Loan' Irrelevant; If Ingredients Met, It Is A 'Deposit' Under MPID Act: Supreme Court Pleadings Must State Material Facts, Not Evidence; Deficiency In Pleading Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal: Supreme Court Denial Of Remission Cannot Rest Solely On Heinousness Of Crime; Justice Doesn't Permit Permanent Incarceration In Shadow Of Worst Act: Supreme Court Second Application For Rejection Of Plaint Barred By Res Judicata If Earlier Order Attained Finality: Supreme Court Section 6(5) Hindu Succession Act Is A Saving Clause, Not A Jurisdictional Bar To Partition Suits: Supreme Court Sale Of Natural Gas Via Common Carrier Pipelines Is An Inter-State Sale; UP Has No Jurisdiction To Levy VAT: Supreme Court Mediclaim Reimbursement Not Deductible From Motor Accident Compensation; Tortfeasor Can’t Benefit From Claimant’s Prudence: Supreme Court Rules Of Procedure Are Handmaid Of Justice, Not Mistress; Striking Off Defence Under Order XV Rule 5 CPC Is Not Mechanical: Supreme Court Power To Strike Off Tenant's Defense Under Order XV Rule 5 CPC Is Discretionary, Not To Be Exercised Mechanically: Supreme Court Areas Urbanised Before 1959 Don't Require Separate Notification To Fall Under Delhi Rent Control Act: Delhi High Court Police Cannot Freeze Bank Accounts To Perform Compensatory Justice; Direct Nexus With Offence Essential: Bombay High Court FSL Probe Before Electronic Evidence Meets Section 65B Admissibility Standards: Gujarat High Court Court Shouldn't Adjudicate Rights At Stage Of Granting Leave Under Section 92 CPC, Only Prima Facie Case Required: Allahabad High Court Right To Seek Bail Based On Non-Furnishing Of 'Grounds Of Arrest' Applies Only Prospectively From November 6, 2025: Madras High Court Prior Exposure To Accused Before TIP Renders Identification Meaningless: Delhi High Court Acquits Four In Uphaar Cinema Murder Case No Particular Format Prescribed For 'Proposed Resolution' In No-Confidence Motion; Intention Of Members To Be Gathered From Document As A Whole: Orissa High Court Trial Court Cannot Grant Temporary Injunction Without Adverting To Allegations Of Fraud And Collusion: Calcutta High Court "Ganja" Definition Under NDPS Act Excludes Roots & Stems: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail As Seized Weight Included Whole Plants Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Doesn't Displace Section 37 NDPS Mandate In Commercial Quantity Cases: Orissa High Court

GUJARAT HIGH COURT REFUSED TO QUASH FIR  IN ABETMENT OF SUICIDE AND CRUELTY CASE AGAINST HUSBAND AND IN-LAWS

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad upheld its decision to proceed with the trial in a case involving allegations of abetment of suicide and cruelty to a married woman. The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt on 12th July 2023.

The case, Criminal Misc. Application No. 11831 of 2021, was brought before the court as an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking the quashing of FIR C.R. No. 11206038210259 of 2021. The FIR was registered against the applicant, Pravinsinh Harisinh Chavda, and others for offences punishable under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide), 498A (cruelty to a married woman), and 114 (abettor present when offence is committed) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

During the proceedings, the applicant's counsel argued that no prima facie case was made out against the applicant, as the alleged incidents of mental and physical harassment occurred more than 12 months before the deceased committed suicide. Furthermore, no suicide note was found at the scene, leading them to contend that no offence under Section 306 or Section 498A of IPC was established.

In response, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP) representing the State of Gujarat presented the contention that the allegations in the FIR pointed to continuous harassment faced by the deceased due to her inability to conceive, as well as the selling of golden ornaments given by her father at the time of marriage.

The court, after examining the legal precedents on abetment of suicide and cruelty to married women, ruled that a prima facie case was established based on the allegations in the FIR and the chargesheet filed during the investigation. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt opined that sufficient material was available for the trial to proceed and that the application for quashing the FIR should be dismissed.

In delivering the judgment, the court referred to various judgments, including those from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, to support its decision. The ruling clarified that while the application for quashing was considered, there was enough material to proceed with the trial, and the court declined to exercise its powers under Section 482 of CrPC.

The judgment highlights the court's commitment to a fair trial and adherence to legal principles while determining the existence of a prima facie case in matters involving abetment of suicide and cruelty to married women.

Date of Decision: 12th July 2023

PRAVINSINH HARISINH CHAVDA  vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Latest Legal News