SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 18

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.K. Prasad, Jagdish Singh Khehar, JJ.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Kishanbhai Etc. – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1485 OF 2008
Decided On : 07-01-2014

Headnote:Criminal law-Investigation-On completion of investigation in a criminal case prosecuting agency should apply its independent mind and require all shortcomings to be rectified, if necessary by requiring further investigation-It should also be ensured that evidence gathered during investigation is truly and faithfully utilized, by confirming that all relevant witnesses and materials for proving charges are conscientiously presented during trial of a case-Only person against whom there is sufficient evidence will have to suffer rigors of criminal prosecution and concerned agencies will be able to successfully establish guilt of accused. (Para 19)

       Criminal law-Acquittal-Every acquittal should be understood as a failure of justice delivery system, in serving cause of justice and every acquittal should ordinarily lead to inference that an innocent person was wrongfully prosecuted-Every State should put in place a procedural mechanism which would ensure that cause of justice is served which would simultaneously ensure safeguard of interest of those who are innocent-Home Department of every State directed to examine all orders of acquittal and to record reasons for failure of each prosecution case-On culmination of a criminal case in qcquittal concerned investigating/prosecuting official(s) responsible for such acquittal must necessarily be identified. (Paras 20 and 21)

       (1974)1 SCR 650; (2001)6 SCC 145; (1994)3 SCC 381; (2000)1 SCC 471; (2000)1 SCC 471; (2001)1 SCC 652; (2005)5 SCC 197; (2005)3 SCC 114; (2007)11 SCC 467; (2010)2 SCC 583; (2010)10 SCC 374; (2011)12 SCC 56; (2012)4 SCC 37-Relied.

       

Judgement Key Points

The reason for acquittal is mentioned in the paragraph that discusses the deficiencies in investigation and evidence collection, which led to the failure to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is typically detailed in the paragraph analyzing the lapses or shortcomings that resulted in the decision to acquit.

Based on the information provided, the relevant paragraph is the one that highlights these investigation lapses and their impact on the case's outcome, which is paragraph number (!) .


JUDGMENT

Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.

1. A complaint was lodged at Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad, alleging the kidnapping/abduction of a six year old girl child Gomi daughter of Keshabhai Mathabhai Solanki and Laliben on 27.2.2003 at around 6:00 p.m. by the accused Kishanbhai son of Velabhai Vanabhai Marwadi. It was alleged, that the accused had enticed Gomi with a “gola” (crushed ice, with sweet flavoured syrup), and thereupon had taken her to Jivi’s field, where he raped her. He had murdered her by inflicting injuries on her head and other parts of the body with bricks. In order to steal the “jhanjris” (anklets) worn by her, he had chopped off her feet just above her ankles. The aforesaid complaint was lodged, after the body of the deceased Gomi was found from Jivi’s field, at the instance of the accused Kishanbhai. On the receipt of the above complaint, the first information report came to be registered at Navrangpur Police Station, Ahmedabad.

2. The prosecution version which emerged consequent upon the completion of the investigation reveals, that the family of the deceased Gomi was distantly related to the family of the accused Kishanbhai. In this behalf it would be pertinent to mention that Baghabhai Naranbhai Solanki was a resident of Gulbai Tekra, in the Navrangpura area of Ahmedabad. He resided there, along with his family. For his livelihood, Baghabhai Naranbhai Solanki was running a shop in the name of Mahakali Pan Centre. The said shop was located near his residence. Baghabhai Naranbhai Solanki was running the business of selling “pan and bidi” in his shop. Naranbhai Manabhai Solanki, father of Baghabhai Naranbhai Solanki used to live in the peon’s quarters at Ambavadi in Ahmedabad. Modabhai Manabhai Solanki, uncle of Baghabhai Naranbhai Solanki, had expired. His son Devabhai’s daughter Laliben, was married to Keshabhai Mathabhai Solanki. Keshabhai Mathabhai Solanki and Laliben were residing at Shabamukhiwas, Gulbai Tekra in Ahmedabad. Keshabhai Mathabhai Solanki and Laliben had two children, a daughter Gomi aged six years, and a son Himat aged three years. Laliben’s sister-in-law (her husband’s, elder brother’s wife) Fuliben Valabhai was residing near the residence of Keshabhai Mathabhai Solanki and Laliben. Kishanbhai the accused, is the brother of Fuliben, and was residing with her. It is therefore, that the family of the deceased as also the accused, besides being distantly related, were acquainted with one another as they were residing close to one another.

3. Insofar as the occurrence is concerned, according to the prosecution, on 27.2.2003 Laliben, niece of Baghabhai, was confined to her residence, as she was expecting. At about 6:00 p.m. her daughter Gomi, then aged 6 years, had wandered out of her house. The accused Kishanbhai then aged 19 years, entice her by giving her a “gola”. Having enticed her he had carried Gomi to Jivi’s field. On the way to Jivi’s field, he stole a knife with an 8 inch blade from Dineshbhai Karsanbhai Thakore PW6, a “dabeli” (bread/bun, with spiced potato filling) seller. Having taken Gomi to Jivi’s field he had raped her. He had then killed her by causing injuries on her head and other parts of the body with bricks. In order to remove the “jhanjris” worn by her, he had amputated her legs with the knife stolen by him, from just above her ankles. He had then covered her body with his shirt, and had left Jivi’s field. Kishanbhai the accused, then took the anklets stolen by him to Mahavir Jewellers, a shop owned by Premchand Shankerlal. He pledged the anklets at the above shop, for a sum of Rs.1,000/-. The accused Kishanbhai was confronted by Baghabhai and others constituting the search party, whilst he was on his way back to his residence. Kishanbhai, despite stating that he had not taken her away, had informed those searching for Gomi, that she could be at Jivi’s field. On the suggestion of Kishanbhai, the search party had gone to Jivi’s farm, where they found the body of Gomi.

4







































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top