Gujarat High Court
Judgename :B.C.PATEL, K.R.VYAS
STATE OF GUJARAT - Appellant
Versus
SATWARA KALYANJI MAVJI - Respondent
C.A. 3985 of .
Decided On : 09/30/1992
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 174 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 114 – Quarrel between husband and wife - – Respondent No. 2 is father of respondent No. 1. Out of the said wedlock there were three daughters and they were situated of village near a place known as Goradiya Hanuman. It appears that there were some quarrels between the husband and wife wherein the deceased was beaten up however due to the intervention of certain persons the quarrels ended in reconciliation – Before about eight days from incident the deceased had an occasion to go to her parents where she complained before them about ill-treatment by her husband and in-laws under petty excuses – Incident in question happened in the morning of respondent and informed him that his wife is sick and that she had become unconscious and therefore he had come to village Dhrol to call Doctor – Then respondent No. 1 alongwith Chaku Arjan met one Doctor at Kevalia who advised them to go to Government Hospital. Accordingly both of them met – Both of them informed that a woman had become unconscious and summoned the Doctor to Wadi for purpose of examining her. In reply thereto the Doctor told them that if woman had become unconscious she may be brought to the hospital – However they requested the Doctor to first examine her and that if necessary she would be letter on brought to hospital. Thereupon Dr. Panara went to the Wadi by his motorcycle with Chaku Arjan as the pillion rider while respondent No. 1 came by bicycle – When the Doctor reached house of respondent No. 1 in Wadi he found the deceased lying in a room covered with mattresses – Doctor after removing matresses upon examination found her dead – Held, Supreme Court that Appellate Court can take additional evidence of can order to take additional evidence if it reaches a conclusion that the trial held is unsatisfactory of leads to failure of justice failure of justice is a prime consideration for Appellate Court in exercising the discretion Considering the guidelines in the said judgment we are required to decide Application on hand We are conscious of fact that power is required to be exercised sparingly and only in suitable cases and therefore the question before us is whether the application before us is of that category wherein we should exercise our discretion in granting permission to adduce additional evidence As stated above in the instant case the prosecution has already produced documents vide list respondents were aware about said documents However due to negligence on the part of the prosecutor the said documents have not been proved The documents in question are Panchanama of scene of offence Inquest Panchanama report forwarded to PSO etc – Which are merely required to be proved formally The prosecution could have proved these documents by examining panchas and Police Constable Since this is a case which rests on circumstantial evidence and the allegation that the respondent No. 1 has committed the murder of his own wife more particularly in view of the fact that the dead body was found from the house of the respondents the ligature mark on the neck of the deceased and some other injuries on the person of the deceased having been found by the Doctor the respondent No. 1 even though knowing the said facts fully well having informed – Criminal Application is allowed.
( 1 ) RULE. Mr. H. P. Raval waives service of rule. Leave to amend.
( 2 ) THIS Misc. Criminal Application has been filed seeking permission to examine the following witnesses: (I) Bhavarlal Megharam Head constable at present working in Jamnagar City A-Division Police Station who had interrogated the accused under Section 174 of the Cr. P. C. at CR No. 3 of 1982 of Dhrol Police Station in connection with the accidental death of deceased Raliyat-wife of respondent No. 1 herein with a view to proving his report mark 6/3 dated 15-3-1982 sent to the police Station officer at village Dhrol; and (ii) Panch Panla Mada Bharwad etc. for the purpose of proving the Inquest Report Mark 6/10 Panchnama of scene of offence Mark 6/11 and other documents.
( 3 ) IN order to decide this application it is necessary to mention certain facts. Deceased Raliyat aged 22 who was the daughter of Chaku Jiva Satwara PW 3 Exh. 11-the complainant in the present case was married to the respondent No. 1 which took place about seven years before the date of incident. The respondent No. 2 is the father of the respondent No. 1. Out of the said wedlock there were three daughters and they were stayng in a Wadi situated in the sim of village Dhrol near a place known as Goradiya Hanuman. It appears that there were some quarrels between the husband and wife wherein the deceased was beaten up however due to the intervention of certain persons the quarrels ended in reconciliation. Before about eight days from the incident the deceased had an occasion to go to her parents where she complained before them about ill-treatment by her husband and in-laws under petty excuses. The incident in question happened in the morning of 15-3-1982. The respondent No. 1 met Chaku Arjan PW. 6 Exh. 14 and informed him that his wife is sick and that she had become unconscious and therefore he had come to village Dhrol to call the Doctor. Then the respondent No. 1 alongwith Chaku Arjan met one Doctor at Kevalia who advised them to go to Government Hospital. Accordingly both of them met Dr. Gordhan Mavjibhai Panara PW. 2 Exh. 10 at about 12. 00 noon. Both of them informed Dr. Panara that a woman had become unconscious and summoned the Doctor to the Wadi for the piurpose of examining her. In reply thereto the Doctor told them that if the woman had become unconscious she may be brought to the hospital. However they requested the Doctor to first examine her and that if necessary she would be letter on brought to the hospital. Thereupon Dr. Panara went to the Wadi by his motorcycle with Chaku Arjan as the pillion rider while the respondent No. 1 came by bicycle. When the Doctor reached the house of the respondent No. 1 in the Wadi he found the deceased lying in a room covered with matresses. The Doctor after removing the matresses upon examination found her dead. The Doctor noticed rope marks on the neck of the deceased and having realised that the death had occurred under suspicious circumstances asked them to bring the dead body to the hospital. According to the Doctor all the family members of the respondents including the respondent No. 2 were present in the house. He further stated that the woman was examined between 12 noon to 1. 00 p. m. The Doctor upon reaching the hospital informed the police on phone that one lady had expired under suspicious circumstances. Exh. 21 is the entry in the Station Diary of Joria Police Station. As per the said entry the Doctor informed the Police Staiton about the death of a woman however no details have been given. Accordingly Head Constable Bhavarlal went to the hospital to enquire about the message where he prepared the Panchnama of the dead body and also prepared the Inquest Report Mark 6/10. Thereafter he made enquiries regarding the cause of death by interrogating the respondent No. 1 and after getting information from the respondent No. 1 which was reduced into writing he forwarded the same to the Police Station Officer Dhrol vide Exh. 6
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.