Back
2019 Supreme(Guj) 537
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ANANT S. DAVE, BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Koli Mansukh Lalji – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 468 of 1995
Decided On : 01-07-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. Nisha Thakore.
For the Respondent: Mr. Hardik K. Raval.
Headnote:
Bombay Police Act, 1951 – Section 135 – Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378, 302 – Complainant alleged to have done to death by accused by inflicting two blows on her head with sword case as per prosecution is that when daughter of complainant, on previous day of alleged incident, had gone to fetch water from hand pump at panchayat, accused teased her near his house which near hand pump, gitated appeal challenging judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge by judgment under challenge, respondent who tried for offences murder acquitted –prosecution that at complainant heard scream and therefore she and Chaku went towards Savji Jivan’s house where she saw Mansukh running away with blood stained sword, Rasila lying on floor in pool of blood, deceased taken to hospital but could not saved and succumbed to her injuries – Held, There is sufficient medical and forensic evidence placed on record by prosecution to bring home guilt of appellant, there is no point in concluding that witnesses would shield real culprit and rope accused, we are of opinion that testimonies of witness account for incident in truthful manner and circumstances leading to death of victim, there is no room for any doubt regarding veracity of testimonies and manner in which victim done to death by the accused, we are of opinion that trial court committed an error in acquitting respondent- accused, respondent-accused is required to be held guilty for offence punishable under section 302 and therefore we are inclined to allow this appeal filed by State – Appeal allowed. (Para 20, 21, 22)
Facts of the case:
Complainant alleged to have done to death by accused by inflicting two blows on her head with sword case as per prosecution is that when daughter of complainant, on previous day of alleged incident, had gone to fetch water from hand pump at panchayat, accused teased her near his house which near hand pump, gitated appeal challenging judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge by judgment under challenge, respondent who tried for offences murder acquitted – prosecution that thereafter on complainant’s returning home, her younger daughter went to her relative’s place to sit on swing and Chaku and complainant had resumed their household chores, it is case of prosecution that at complainant heard scream and therefore she and Chaku went towards Savji Jivan’s house where she saw Mansukh running away with blood stained sword, Rasila lying on floor in pool of blood, deceased taken to hospital but could not saved and succumbed to her injuries
Findings of the court:
There is sufficient medical and forensic evidence placed on record by prosecution to bring home guilt of appellant, there is no point in concluding that witnesses would shield real culprit and rope accused, we are of opinion that testimonies of witness account for incident in truthful manner and circumstances leading to death of victim, there is no room for any doubt regarding veracity of testimonies and manner in which victim done to death by the accused, we are of opinion that trial court committed an error in acquitting respondent- accused, respondent-accused is required to be held guilty for offence punishable under section 302 and therefore we are inclined to allow this appeal filed by State.
Result: Appeal allowed.
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. The State is in appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30.12.1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar in Sessions Case No. 100 of 1993. By the judgment under challenge, the respondent who was tried for offences under Section 302, IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 was acquitted.
2. As per the prosecution case, the incident in question has been narrated by the complainant-Kantaben, who is the mother of the deceased Rasila, aged 10, alleged to have been done to death by the accused-Mansukh by inflicting two blows on her head with a sword. The case as per the prosecution is that when Chakuben-daughter of complainant, on the previous day of the alleged incident, had gone to fetch water from the hand pump at the panchayat, the accused Mansukh teased her near his house which was near the hand pump. On the day of the incident Chaku narrated the same to Kantaben, who thereafter went to the accused Mansukh’s house and admonished him to keep off from teasing her daughter Chaku. Mansukh was present at his house with his mother and reportedly at being reprimanded by Kantaben, he became agitated. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter on the complainant’s returning home, her younger daughter Rasila went to her relative’s place to sit on the swing and Chaku and the complainant had resumed their household chores. It is the case of the prosecution that at around 10.30 am the complainant heard Rasila scream and therefore she and Chaku went towards Savji Jivan’s house where she saw Mansukh running away with a blood stained sword. Rasila was lying on the floor in a pool of blood. The deceased was taken to hospital but could not be saved and succumbed to her injuries.
2.1 The accused was arrested. After the investigation was completed, charge-sheet was filed against the accused charging the accused for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court, Bhavnagar. The prosecution sought to prove its case on the basis of ocular and documentary evidences, mainly, which were as under:-
S. No.
Name of Witness
Exhibit No.
1
Maganbhai Somabhai
16
2
Naranbhai Arjanbhai
18
3
Ratnabhai Karshanbhai
19
4
Ramjibhai Ukabhai
20
5
Laxmiben Lavjibhai
22
6
Hirjibhai Savjibhai
21
7
Dhirubhai Chhanabhai
23
8
Champaben Manubhai
24
9
Kantaben Ramjibhai
25
10
Jamnaben Valjibhai
26
11
Chakuben Ramjibhai
27
12
Diwaliben Bhavanbhai
28
13
Dr. Dhirajbhai Maganbhai Bhatt
29
14
PSI Keshubhai Rambhai Bhuva
31
2.2 The documentary evidence for substantiating the version of the witnesses have been filed which were as follows:-
S. No.
Name of Document
Exhibit No.
1
Inquest panchnama
7
2
Panchnama of clothes and blood sample of deceased
10
3
Map of scene of offence
13
4
Discovery panchnama of muddamal weapon
19
5
Panchnama of local place
17
6
Arrest panchnama
23
7
P.M. Report
30
8
Complaint
32
9
Yadi sent to police station by Savarkundla hospital
33
10
FSL report
36
11
Serological report
37
12
Notification of wea
