Back
2009 Supreme(Guj) 614
High Court of Gujarat
R.R.Tripathi
Jayantibhai Mathurbhai Patel
Vs.
State of Gujarat
Cri. Revn. Apple. No. 658 of 2008
Decided On : Nov 12, 2009
Advocate Appeared:
B.M.Mangukiya, Bela A.Prajapati, D.C.Sejpal
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 504/114 and 300 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 227 - Bombay Police Act - Section 135 - Offence of Murder - 'hear-say' evidence - Appeal against conviction - Police recorded statements of as many as 19 persons of whom wife is the mother of accused - Even she admits that on fateful day an incident had taken place which takes care of submissions made by counsel for petitioners with all vehemence that, 'the entire incident is got up one and it is a creation of fertile brain of police authorities' - Number of statements were requested to be discarded on ground that those are statements of witnesses who are not eye witnesses but who deposed only as 'hear-say' - Held, Only because counsel for petitioner is able to assert with vehemence that does not make the submissions good. It is a fit case wherein a regular trial is warranted - Post-mortem report which records aforesaid cause of death - Counsel for petitioners while reading entries made in column 20 of post mortem report submitted that he is not able to read - If that is so then submission made with all vehemence that, 'the death was a natural death' is a 'hollow' assertion - Petition dismissed.
(1) The matter is notified along with Criminal Misc. Application No. 5587 of 2009 at Sr. No. 28 in Board No. 1.
(2) The present Revision Application is filed by the petitioners, Jayantibhai Mathurbhai Patel and two others, who are the original accused in CR No. 1-36/2007 at Kothamba Police Station. The petitioners have prayed that: 19a) Be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated September 23, 2008 in application below Exh. 2 in Sessions Case No. 118 of 2007 and order to discharge the petitioners in connection with the First information Report lodged with Kothamba Police Station, which is recorded as CR No: 1-36 of 2007, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. Heard learned advocate Mr. B. M. Mangukiya for the petitioners.
(3) The learned advocate for the petitioners invited attention of the Court to the FIR which is produced at Annexure 'A', page Nos. 16 to 19. The same, was read in toto. The learned advocate also invited attention of the Court to the statement of Niruben, wife of Gordhanbhai Kantibhai Patel,, who has died in the incident alleged. The said, statement is more or less on the lines of the FIR and what is stated in the FIR is reiterated by the wife of the deceased.
(4) The learned advocate for the petitioner then invited attention of the Court to the inquest panchnama, page Nos. 55 to 5.7; Panchnama of the place of offence, page Nos. 58 to 60; panchnama of recovery, of clothes of the deceased, page Nos. 61 and 62; panchnama of recovery of the clothes of the accused Jayantibhai Mathurbhai Patel, page Nos. 63 and 64; arrest panchnama, page Nos. 65 and 66; discovery panchnama whereby wooden log Ado was recovered by the police authority on the same being pointed out by the accused, page Nos. 67 to 69.
Learned advocate for the petitioners then invited Attention of the court to various statements recorded by the police. The learned advocate read the relevant part of the statements of the following persons :
(i) Mahendrabhai Kantibhai Patel brother of deceased, page Nos. 70 to 72;
(ii) Ankurkumar Gordhanbhai Patel, son of the deceased, page Nos. 73 to 75;
(iii) Satishkumar Gordhanbhai Patel, son of the deceased, page Nos, 76 and 77;
(iv) Savankumar Mahendrabhai Patel, son of brother of the deceased, page Nos. 78 and 79;
(v) Kokilaben, wife of Mahendrabhai Kantilal Patel, wife of brother of deceased, page Nos. 80 and 81:
(vi) Shantilal Gokalbhai Patel, brother-in- law of deceased, page Nos. 82 and 83;
(vii) Kokilaben, wife of Shantilal Gordhanbhai Patel, daughter-in-law of deceased, page Nos. 84 and 85;
(viii) Vaneshkumar Mahendrabhai Patel, son of the brother of the deceased, page Nos. 86 to 88;
(ix) Darshnaben wife of Vaneshkumar Mahendrabhai Patel, wife of son of the brother of deceased, page Nos. 89 and 90;
(x) Fuliben, wife of Kantibhai Jorabhai Patel, mother of deceased, page Nos. 91 and 92; .
(xi) Manilal Kantilal Patel, brother-in-law of the deceased, page Nos. 93 and 94;
(xii) Kamleshbhai Jayantibhai Patel, a neighbour of the deceased (an independent witness not related to either side), page Nos. 95 and 96;
(xiii) Ramilaben, wife of Kiritbhai Jethabhai Patel. neighbour of the deceased, page Nos. 97 and 98;
(xiv) Ramilaben wife of Kiritbhai Jethabhai Patel, page Nos. 99 and 100 (produced again);
(xv) Kantibhai Vinodbhai Patel, neighbour of the deceased (check) page No. 101;
(xvi) Chaturbhai Sakhidas Patel, a neighbour of deceased, page No. 102;
(xvii) Arvindbhai Babarbhai Patel, a witness who heard about the incident, page No. 104:
(xviii) Mukeshbhai Parsottambhai Patel, a person who was to accompany the brother of deceased on the day of the incident to Gandhinagar but later on he was informed by the brother of the deceased that as the incident has taken place he is not able to accompany the deponent and the, deponent may go alone to Gandhinagar, page Nos. 105 and 106;
(xix) Premilaben, wife of Jayantibhai Mathurbhai Patel, m
