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

2017 Supreme(Guj) 727

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.R. Brahmbhatt and A.J. Shastri, JJ.
Ajim Yusufbhai Suryamemon - Appellants
Vs.
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (Against Conviction) No. 280 of 2015
Decided On : 07-04-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.D. Shah
For the Respondents: L.R. Poojari

Headnote:

Gujarat Police Act - Section 135(1) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Offence of Murder – Original accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine – On account of dispute between the appellant accused and the complainant side, though Shoeb and the appellant-accused were good friends, the accused was demanding the amount from Shoeb. As per the case of prosecution, as the appellant has picked up a quarrel with Shoeb in connection with the monetary dispute resulting in scuffle, a complaint came to be filed before Pradhyuman Nagar Police Station by appellant accused Ajim against Shoeb alleging infliction of a knife injury, but from that day onwards, strained relations existed between the appellant and the complainant. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter, appellant accused Ajim used to administer threat time and again to Shoeb and his brother – Held, evidence and the circumstances are sufficient enough to suggest that a serious doubt is emerging from the record which benefit must lean in favour of the appellant accused and accordingly, in the background of such suspicious circumstances, we are unable to affirm the view of the trial court whereby an order of conviction is passed and therefore, we deem it proper in our considered opinion to set aside judgment and order of conviction and to allow the appeal filed by the appellant accused – Compared medical evidence with oral evidence as well and by applying the rule of careful scrutiny of interested witnesses, we are of the considered opinion that the case put up by the prosecution is based upon a very weak piece of evidence upon which, no ultimate conclusion of guilt of the accused is possible to be established beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly, the conviction based upon such piece of evidence appears to be unsustainable – Appeal Allowed

JUDGMENT :

A.J. Shastri, J.

1. The present Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant-original accused under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) against the judgment and order dated 23.1.2015 passed in Sessions Case No. 37 of 2012 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, whereby original accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under section 135(1) of Gujarat Police Act. Both these sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The accused was given set off for the period already undergone in jail.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on account of dispute between the appellant accused and the complainant side, though Shoeb and the appellant-accused were good friends, the accused was demanding the amount from Shoeb. As per the case of prosecution, as the appellant has picked up a quarrel with Shoeb in connection with the monetary dispute resulting in scuffle, a complaint came to be filed before Pradhyuman Nagar Police Station by appellant accused Ajim against Shoeb alleging infliction of a knife injury, but from that day onwards, strained relations existed between the appellant and the complainant. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter, appellant accused Ajim used to administer threat time and again to Shoeb and his brother.

2.1 The prosecution case has further travelled by asserting that on 25.11.2011 at about 11 p.m. to 11.15 p.m., Shoeb Gafar received a telephonic message from one Imran Iqbal Banani informing that his brother Imran had been inflicted a knife blow by somebody near Mohammadbhai's Lati on road and is lying in bleeding condition. It is further the case of the prosecution that Imran Banani informed Shoeb Gafar that they are taking Imran, the victim, to the Government hospital in Cruiser car of Riyas Iqbalbhai Parekh and he was informed to come down to the Government Hospital. Pursuant to that, at about 11.45 p.m., the complainant Shoeb Gafar went to the Government Hospital where he saw his brother in a bleeding condition with sharp cutting wound on his neck and the doctor pronounced him dead. This incident in question was registered as a complaint before Kalavad Police Station being C.R. No. 182 of 2011 for the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC read with section 135 of Bombay Police Act. After registering the complaint, the Investigating Officer has conducted investigation and the appellant accused came to be arrested on 4.12.2011. Investigating Officer has recorded statements of relevant witnesses, drawn panchnama of scene of offence, executed arrest panchnama, collected muddamal articles and sent the body to FSL for further examination and for performing post mortem. After collecting every particulars during the course of investigation, a detailed charge sheet came to be submitted on 18.2.2012 against the appellant accused in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalavad, for the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC read with section 135(1) of Gujarat Police Act.

2.2 As the criminal case, which came to be registered, is triable by the Court of Sessions, in exercise of power under section 209 of Cr.P.C., learned Judicial Magistrate First Class was pleased to commit the case to the Court of Sessions and the same was then registered as Sessions Case No. 37 of 2012 which has come up for consideration before the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar.

2.3 Record indicates that pursuant to committal of the case, a charge came to be framed vide Exh. 11 which was read over to the appellant accused



































































































































































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