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

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
P.M. Chauhan, J.
Panachand Somabhai and others -Petitioners
versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Misc. Crl. Application No. 1124 of 1988
Decided on 25-5-1988
D.P. Joshi, Advocate-For the Petitioners.
M.D. Pandya, P.P. - For the State.

IMPORTANT POINT
In a bail application the first statement of the deceased cannot be overlooked which does not reveal that she was harassed by petitioners and her mother-in-law.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 306, 498 - A read with section 34-Petitioners, namely, husband, his younger brother and father charged for abetting his wife for, committing suicide because of harassment by the petitioners and mother-in-law - Bail application - Rejected - Criminal application against - Dying declaration showing no mention of harassment-Fire caused - by accident - Whether petitioners he released on bail? (Yes)(Para 2)

       (Cross Ref. Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 - Dying declaration-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 438-Bail.)

       

JUDGMENT

P.M. Chauhan. J. - Rule, Mr. M.D. Pandya, Addl. P.P. waives service of rule.

2. The petitioners, alongwith Valiben are alleged to have committed offence punishable under sections 306, 498-A read with section 34 I.P.C. On 24-4-88 Manjulaben wife of the 'petitioner No.2 Narendra Panachand received burns and immediately removed to hospital and subsequently succumed to injuries. The complainant Shanaben, the mother of Manjulaben was informed of the incident and she came to hospital. Subsequently, she has filed the F.I.R. alleging that Manjulaben had committed suicide because of harassment by the petitioners and mother-in-law Valiben. Immediately after the incident the statement of Manjulaben was recorded by police and her thumb mark is also secured on the statement. As Manjulaben has succumbed to injuries her statement can be conveniently considered in evidence as a dying declaration. Manjulaben stated, in her statement that she herself, her husband and her child 31Sed about Il years are residing separate from heroin-laws and younger brother of her husband' for about 11/2 years. She was married to petitioner No.2 before 5 years and she was pregnant at the time of incident. About the incident she stated that her husband had gone to witness Ramayan serial on TV and her son was playing and at that time she closed the doors so that her son might not go out of house while and preparing the food her side accidentally caught fire by the flames of stove and she immediately shouted and her son caught her and also got injuries of hearing her shouts neighbours rushed and subsequently her husband came and removed her to hospital. It is submitted by Mr. Pandya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor that from the statement which Manjulaben made before the complainant it transpires that she was being harassed by the petitioners and mother-in-law Valiben and certain statements of the neighbours also recorded by the police. At this stage the first statement of Manjulaben which is recorded by the police cannot be overlooked for the purpose of bail. Considering the facts discussed above and circumstances all the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on executing bond of Rs. 5,000/- each with solvent surety in like amount and P. R. Rule made absolute.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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