Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Anant S. Dave and B.N. Karia, JJ.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Vs.
Bharvad Manubhai Chakubhai – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 100 and 105 of 2006
Decided On : 04-08-2016
The court set aside the acquittal order and convicted the accused of offenses under Sections 302, 337, 427, 435, 436, 452, 504, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, read with Sections 147, 148, and 149 of the IPC, and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The court found that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt based on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, post-mortem reports, FSL reports, scene of offense panchnama, inquest panchnama, and recovery of muddamal articles. The court held that the testimonies of eyewitnesses were probable, trustworthy, and reliable, and that the accused had committed the crimes with the intention to kill persons of the Muslim community and to cause damage and destruction to their property.
Fact of the Case:
A mob of 200 persons armed with deadly weapons attacked a Muslim family's house, killing two family members and burning their bodies. The accused were acquitted by the trial court, but the state appealed the acquittal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt based on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, post-mortem reports, FSL reports, scene of offense panchnama, inquest panchnama, and recovery of muddamal articles. The court held that the testimonies of eyewitnesses were probable, trustworthy, and reliable, and that the accused had committed the crimes with the intention to kill persons of the Muslim community and to cause damage and destruction to their property.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the testimonies of eyewitnesses were credible and reliable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt based on the following evidence: * The testimonies of eyewitnesses, who identified the accused and described the manner in which the crimes were committed. * The post-mortem reports, which confirmed the cause of death of the victims. * The FSL reports, which confirmed the presence of bloodstains on the weapons recovered from the accused. * The scene of offense panchnama, which described the condition of the crime scene and the injuries sustained by the victims. * The inquest panchnama, which confirmed the identity of the victims. * The recovery of muddamal articles, which included the weapons used in the crimes and the clothes worn by the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the acquittal order and convicted the accused of offenses under Sections 302, 337, 427, 435, 436, 452, 504, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, read with Sections 147, 148, and 149 of the IPC, and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The court sentenced the accused to life imprisonment with remission and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each for the offense under Section 302 of the IPC, and to various terms of imprisonment and fines for the other offenses.
Anant S. Dave, J.
1. Criminal Appeal No. 105/2006 is filed by appellant/State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short 'code 1973'), against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 14.06.2005, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. No. 2, Mahesana, in Sessions Case No. 223/2002 and Sessions Case No. 42/2004, which were tried together. The respondents herein came to be acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 302, 337, 427, 435, 436, 452, 504, 506(2) with Sections 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.
2. That Criminal Appeal No. 100/2006 under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, also arise out of Sessions Case No. 42 of 2004, vide judgment and order dated 14.06.2005, acquitting the accused-respondents of the offence, to which mention is made in earlier paragraph.
3. Both these appeals are heard finally. The genesis of the case of prosecution is in the complaint lodged by the complaint pursuant to widespread communal riots, which took place in the State of Gujarat pursuant to setting ablaze a train at Godhra Railway Station in the year 2002. The complaint at Exh. 47 dated 03.03.2002, lodged at camp Meda-Aadraj around 23:45, the complainant Dosumiyan Amirmiyan residing at the village Meda-Aadraj, Kumbhaar Vaas, Taluka: Kadi, is aged about 35 years, by caste Saiyeed-Muslim having occupation as a farm labourer stated as under:
"On personally asking me I state the facts of my complaint that I am residing at the above mentioned address with my family and I am doing farm labour in Medaraj village, and we are total seven brothers and sisters, amongst us are five brothers and two sisters. The eldest brothers is Ismailbhai, and younger to him is sister Jeniben, younger to her is brother Kalubhai. Younger to him is myself, and younger to me is Sehumiya and younger to him is Mehsudmiya, and youngest is Amidaben. All of us brothers and sisters are married. All five brothers are living separate in Medadraj, and my sisters are living in their matrimonial house. Near to my house my elder brother Kalumiya is living with his family. Recently in Godhra the Kar Sevaks returning from Ayodhya were attacked by muslims and burnt the railway coaches and had killed many Hindus, such news was published in the newspapers and on the T.V. thus in our village with a view that there should not be any communal incidents take therefore police bandobast was made, and in our village there are 60 to 70 muslim families living, and is such atmosphere we were present in our vas, and on the corner of the vas there was police bandobast made, in the meanwhile today at night at about ten o'clock our village Patels and their other unknown persons almost about two hundred persons mob came carrying sickle, spear, sticks, pipes and etc weapons in our vas and shouting abuses and slogans to cut and kill and myself and my elder brother Kalumiya and daughter of Kalumiya Hasina @ Hasinaben aged 20 and my sister-in-law Madinabibi were present in their house and the mob was seen coming towards our house and amongst them were our village inhabitant Patel Girishbhai Ambalal carrying sickle, and Patel Mukeshbhai Somabhai carrying sickle and illegible bhai Rameshbhai Kantibhai carrying sickle. Illegible bhai Babubhai's elder son whom I know on seeing carrying spear, and patel Niles Naranbhai carrying pipe and Patel Ramabhai Baldevbhai's elder son whom I know on seeing carrying axe (kodadi) and Prafulbhai Sarpanch's son Bako carrying farsi and Mukesh Amratbhai Ramdas carrying sickle and Mukeshbhai Mahendrabhai carrying sickle, and Patel Dineshbhai Jashwantbhai carrying sickle, and Patel Ajitbhai Girdharbhai's elder son whose name I do not know carrying sickle, and Patel Somabhai Hirabhai's middle son whose name I do not know carry
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
