2015 Supreme(Guj) 907
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
K.S. Jhaveri and R.P. Dholaria, JJ.
Dinesh - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 317 of 2004
Decided On : 04.12.2015
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant :H.L. Patel, Advocate.
For Respondents: J.M. Panchal, Spl. PP.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 302—Murder—Appeal against conviction—Death of deceased happened as a result of accident which took place between the motorcycle— No reason persuading enough to not hold appellant guilty of death of deceased as a result of vehicular accident which involved accused—Medical evidence also supports case of prosecution—Nevertheless, no strong motive or premeditation on part of appellant to hold him guilty of offence under section 302 of Indian Penal Code—Deceased had survive for around five days after incident and thereafter expired due to complications from injuries—Conviction of appellant under section 302 of Indian Penal Code is required to be converted to that under section 304(II) of Indian Penal Code—Appellant - original accused ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years under section 304 (Part II) of Indian Penal Code instead of life imprisonment as awarded by trial court under section 302, IPC—Amount of fine and sentence in default of fine maintained.
Result—Appeal Partly allowed.
K.S. Jhaveri, J.
1. Present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 05/01/2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case Nos. 162 and 163 of 2003, whereby, the appellant herein - original accused No. 1 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC') and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant -accused No. 1 was also convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The sentences were to run concurrently, whereas, other accused persons came to be acquitted of the charges levelled against them. Accordingly, present appeal has been filed by the appellant - accused No. 1 against conviction, as aforesaid.
2. Facts in nutshell of the prosecution case are that on 27/02/2002 aftermath of Godhra carnage had broken out at various places in the State of Gujarat. In pursuance of the conspiracy hatched by 40 to 50 persons belonging to Hindu community, they gathered near Pratapkunj Society situated at Vasana, Ahmedabad on 24/03/2002 by forming an unlawful assembly with a common object to use force against the innocent persons. They were armed with deadly weapons. Thus, the accused have committed the offence punishable under Section 143, 148 and 149 of the IPC. After forming the unlawful assembly and with a view to achieve the common object, the accused assaulted one Munna @ Sabban Salimbhai Shaikh and caused injuries to him on his right hand, left hand, nose, waist portion of his body and on the neck and thereby, they committed the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC. The accused, then, attacked the wife of Munna namely Gita @ Mumtaz with knife and gupti and caused injuries on her head, back side and other parts of the body and snuffed out her life and thereby, they committed the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w. Section 149 of the IPC. The accused Nos. 1 to 3 were armed with deadly weapons and thereby, violated the provisions of Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and committed the offence punishable under Section 148 and 188 of the IPC. Thus, the accused committed the alleged offence for which, a complaint came to be lodged against them for the aforesaid offences.
2.1 Pursuant to the complaint, investigation was carried out. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed and as the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed to the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad.
2.2 The trial Court framed charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution produced oral as well as documentary evidence.
2.3 In order to bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined following witnesses and also produced several documentary evidence, as under:
ORAL EVIDENCE
S/n.
Name of Witness
Exh.
1
PW-1 Kalpesh Somabhai Kotharia
16
2
PW-2 Bhikhabhai Ukawala Vadher
18
3
PW-3 Narendrakumar Dahyalal Solanki
27
4
PW-4 Kaushal Kishorbhai Gohel
30
5
PW-5 Manaji Ukaji Padhiyar
31
6
PW-6 Mehtabji Laxmanji Thakore
32
7
PW-7 Harkishan Babulal Gupta
33
8
PW-8 Imtiyazbhai Sulemanbhai Langar
34
9
PW-9 Afzalbhai Hussenbhai Shaikh
35
10
PW-10 Pappu Shankarji Rana
37
11
PW-11 Bhagubhai Bababhai Desai
38
12
PW-12 Rajeshbhai Shantilal Chaudhary
39
13
PW-13 Nalinkumar Somalal Dohi
40
14
PW-14 Gul