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

1983 Supreme(Guj) 84

S.L.TALATI, I.C.BHATT
NARSINHBHAI DAHYABHAI VAGHELA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: BHARAT B.NAIK, K.J.VAIDYA

S. L. TALATI, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Baroda by which he convicted the appellant accused for an offence punishable under sec. 302 1. P. C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment on 30-1-1980 in Sessions Case No. 73 of 1979.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution there was no direct evidence against the accused and the prosecution relied upon the circumstantial evidence. The admitted facts were that the accused was working as a ward boy in the S. S. G. hospital at Baroda while the wife of the deceased was working as an Aya in that hospital. On the relevant day the wife of the deceased Bai Chanchal was in the hospital admitted for the purpose of delivery and therefore deceased Chimanbhai D. Parmar was alone at his house. Children were for the time being residing at the house of father-in-low of Chimanbhai. Now the circumstances on which the prosecution relied upon are the following circumstances;1 Accused was known to the deceased and he was frequently visiting his house. 2 Accused was working as a ward-boy in the S. S. G. Hospital and the wife of the deceased was working as Aya in that hospital. 3 The accused was abse







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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top