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

1996 Supreme(Guj) 406

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :J.M.Panchal, M.H.Kadri
HINABEN HARISHBHAI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 696 of 1988
Decided On : 08/21/1996

Advocates Appeared: K.J.SETHNA, M.A.BUKHARI

Headnote:(a) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sec. 164 - Confession during the course of investigation - Recording of - Only empowered Magistrate competent to record and that too in accordance with the procedure prescribed.As per the provision of Sec. 164 of the Code, confession or statement in the course of an investigation can be recorded either by a Metropolitan Magistrate or by a Judicial Magistrate. The Executive Magistrate was not empowered to record confessional statement of the appellant as he was neither a Metropolitan Magistrate nor a Judicial Magistrate. Further more, when investigation has already commenced, the confessional statement can be recorded by the Magistrate empowered by Sec. 164 of the Code, only in the manner prescribed in the said Section. In view of this legal position, the Executive Magistrate was not empowered to record the confessional statement of the appellant.[Para12]When a Magistrate of the First Class records a confession under Sec. 164, but does not follow the procedure laid down in that section, oral evidence of the confession is inadmissible. The Supreme Court also examined the scope of Sec. 164 of the Code in detail and the rule adopted in Taylor vs. Taylor, (1876) 1 Ch D, 426 to the effect that where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all and that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. The rule adopted in Taylor vs. Taylor, (1876) 1 Ch D 426 is well recognised and is founded on sound principle. Its result is that if a statute has conferred a power to do an act and has laid down the mehtord in which that power has to be exercised, it necessarily prohibits the doing of the act in any other manner than that which has been prescribed. The principle behind the rule is that if this were not so, the statutory provision might as well not have been enacted. A Magistrate, therefore, cannot in the course of investigation record a confession except in the manner laid down in Sec. 164. The power to record the confession had obviously been given so that the confession might be proved by the record of it made in the manner laid down. If proof of the confession by other means was permissible, the whole provision of sec. 164 including the safeguards contained in it for the protection of accused persons would be rendered nugatory.[Para 12](b) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sec. 164 - Confession in Criminal law - Scope & meaning of - Stated.A confession in criminal law means an admission of certain facts which constitute an offence committed by a person charged with the offence which is the subject -matter of confession. A confession must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offene. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact, even a conclusively incriminating fact is not of itself a confession.[Para 11](c) Criminal Trial - Hostile witness - Evidence of hostile witness can be relied upon if it is corroborated by other reliable independent testimony on record.The law regarding appreciation of evidence of hostile witness is that it can be relied upon if it is corroborated by other reliable independent evidence on record. In this case, we find that there is no reliable independent evidence indicating that the appellant with an intention to cause death of her daughter Bhavna threw her in river water and therefore, the evidence of hostile witnesses is of no help to the prosecution.[Para 10]

M. H. KADRI, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant has filed this appeal under Sec. 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging legality and validity of judgment and order dated 19/07/1988 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No. 137 of 1987 whereby she is convicted under Secs. 302, 307 and 309 of the I. P. Code and sentenced to R. I. for life for the offence under sec. 302 of the I. P. Code. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has not imposed any sentence on the appellant under Secs. 307 and 309 of the I. P. Code. Brief facts as unfolded at the trial are as under :

( 2 ) THE appellant who was married with PW 10 Harishbhai Maganbhai Patel was residing at Ichhapore, Surat. Out of the wedlock she had one son Sandip and one daughter Bhavna. It is alleged that the husband of the appellant did not like her. She was, therefore, harassed, beaten, ill-treated and subjected to cruelty by her in-laws. In a fit of disappointment and annoyance she tried to commit suicide on 7-6-1987 at about 10-15 a. m. with her two children. It is alleged that with the intent to cause death of her son and daughter, she threw away her daughter Bhavna in river Tapi and thereafter, along with her son Sandip jumped in the river so as to commit suicide. At the relevant time, the personnel of the Fire Brigade of Surat municipal Corporation were searching dead body of another person in river Tapi. The personnel of the Fire Brigade noticed the appellant jumping in the river and rescued her and her son Sandip. Fire Brigade Sub-Officer Mr. Ishwarbhai narsinghbhai Patel caught hold of the appellant and her son Sandip and brought them out of the water. Mud and water which had entered into the mouth of the appellant and her son were drained out by the personnel of the Fire Brigade and the appellant and her son were sent for medical treatment to Maskati Hostipal, Surat. Police Constable Abhesinh Balubhai who was on duty at the Maskati Hospital, sent a message to the Rander Police Station about the incident and an offence was registered against the appellant under Secs. 309 and 307 of the I. P. Code. On 9-6-1987, dead body of Bhavna was found from river Tapi. Police Inspector Mr. Jadeja, of Rander Police Station, who was in charge of the investigation held inquest on the dead body of Bhavna and sent it for post-mortem examination to the New civil Hospital, Surat. P. I. Mr. Jadeja prepared the panchnama of the scene of offence and recorded statement of the appellant. Yadi was sent to the Executive magistrate to record the dying declaration of the appellant. In the meantime, Dy. Supdt. of Police Mr. Antani took over the investigation and recorded statement of the witnesses. On receipt of the yadi, Executive Magistrate Mr. Rameshchandra pranshanker Joshi reached Maskati Hospital and recorded the dying declaration of the appellant. P. I. Mr. Jadeja, who was in charge of the investigation got prepared the map of the scene of offence and obtained the certificate indicating injuries sustained by the appellant. After completing investigation, P. I. Mr. Jadeja submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Secs. 302, 307 and 309 of the I. P. Code, in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat. As the offences under secs. 302 and 307 are exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the learned magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court, Surat for trial.

( 3 ) THE above case was numbered as Sessions Case No. 137 of 1987 in the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Surat. Charge Ex. 2 was framed against the appellant under Secs. 302, 307 and 309 of the I. P. Code. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant, who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. 4. In order to prove the charges against the appellant, the prosecution examined following witnesses :1. PW 1 Ex. 7 Dr. Gordhanbhai Arjanbhai, 2. PW 2 Ex. 9 Dr. Pravinsinh Badalsinh, 3. PW 3 Ex. 10 Dr. Kusumben Bhagubhai Patel, 4. PW 4 Ex. 12 Ja
















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