Back
2016 Supreme(Guj) 247
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Rajesh H. Shukla, J.
Jayantibhai Prabhubhai Patel - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 690 of 1999
Decided On : 04-02-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Bhavini Jani, Advocate for S.V. Raju, Advocate
For the Respondents: H.L. Jani, APP
The dying declaration and medical evidence are crucial in determining the validity of the offence under Section 330 of the IPC. The court has the discretion to grant probation based on the nature of the offence and the background of the accused.
Headnote:
IPC - Conviction under Sections 330 and 323 - [IPC 330, IPC 323] - The court considered the dying declaration and medical evidence to uphold the conviction under Section 330 of the IPC, which provides for causing hurt to extort confession or to compel restoration of property. The court also extended the benefit of probation to the accused under the Probation of Offenders Act, considering the nature of the offence and the background of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, an employee of the accused, consumed acid and died after being accused of theft and irregularities by the accused. The accused was convicted under Sections 330 and 323 of the IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the conviction under Section 330 of the IPC based on the dying declaration and medical evidence. It also granted the benefit of probation to the accused.
Issues: The court considered the validity of the dying declaration, the nature of the offence under Section 330 of the IPC, and the eligibility of the accused for probation.
Ratio Decidendi: The dying declaration and medical evidence were crucial in upholding the conviction under Section 330 of the IPC. The court exercised discretion to grant probation based on the nature of the offence and the background of the accused.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed partly, upholding the conviction and granting the benefit of probation to the accused.
Rajesh H. Shukla, J.
1. Present Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant- original accused under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the impugned judgment and order passed in Sessions Case No. 257 of 1997 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 18 at Ahmedabad on 18.06.1999 recording conviction and sentence of the appellant-original accused for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 330 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, recording reasons for the same.
2. The facts of the present case briefly summarized are as follows:
3. As it transpires from the material and evidence on the record deceased Alkeshkumar Natwarlal Panchal was serving in the factory of the accused and the accused is alleged to have leveled allegation of theft and/or irregularities against the deceased for which deceased got upset and humiliated and consumed acid in the toilet of the factory. The deceased was taken to the hospital and succumbed to the death, for which initially on the basis of 'Janvajog' Entry No. 17/1999 inquiry was made. Thereafter, investigation was made and the FIR being CR. No. I-238/1997 was registered at Bapunagar Police Station. It was also required to be mentioned that mother of the deceased has given complaint before the Court of Magistrate and therefore M. Case No. 67 of 1997 was also registered and after further inquiry under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the case was registered.
4. After investigation was over, the charge-sheet was filed and as the offence was triable by the court of Sessions, the case was committed to the City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad.
5. Thereafter, learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad framed charges for the offences of the IPC and proceeded with the trial.
6. In order to bring home the charges leveled against the appellant -accused, the prosecution examined the witnesses including the victim and also produced documentary evidence which shall be referred to in the judgment hereinafter.
7. After recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was over, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad recorded the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
8. After hearing learned APP as well as learned Advocate for the accused, the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad recorded the conviction of the appellant-original accused as stated above in the impugned judgment and order.
9. It is this judgment and order which has been assailed on the grounds stated in detail in the memo of appeal, inter alia, that the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad has failed to appreciate the material and evidence on the record.
10. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Bhavini Jani for learned Counsel Shri S.V. Raju for the appellant-original accused and learned Advocate APP Shri H.L. Jani for the Respondent-State.
11. Learned Advocate Ms. Bhavini Jani referred to the papers and the testimony of the witnesses in detail including the testimony of P.W. No. 1 Executive Magistrate who has recorded the dying declaration of the deceased and submitted that he has clearly stated about the cause for the suicide in his testimony. Learned Advocate Ms. Jani also referred to the other papers and submitted the ingredients for the offences punishable under Section 330 of the IPC are not attracted. It was submitted that dying declaration is there but it was not supported the case of the prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 330 of the IPC. She further referred to the FIR and the statement of the victim and submitted that the no case is made out against the present appellant and the Court below has erred in appreciating the material and evidence on the record. She submitted that there are discrepancies in the evidence inasmuch as the P.W.2 brother of the victim in his testimony at Exh. 12 has stated that th
