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

2008 Supreme(Guj) 501

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
C.K. BUCH, H.B. ANATANI, JJ.
Thakor Jina Vershi and Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat - Opponent
Criminal Appeal No. 523 of 1997 With Criminal Appeal No. 532 and 539 of 1997
Decided On : 23-10-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :B.P. Munshi, Ekant Ahuja, Harnish Darji, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Ms. D.S. Pandit, Ld.Addl., Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 326 - Bombay Police Act - Section 135 - Criminal Appeal - All the 14 accused persons were the members of the unlawful assembly and most of them were holding deadly weapons in their hands and they had cornered and assaulted - On the day of incident, the complainant had been to her parental home as her mother was sick, to see her mother - Her brother was standing with his bicycle near the shop at the corner of the road and he told the complainant to fetch flour lying at flour mill - All these accused assaulted victim (deceased), brother of the complainant, on his head and deceased had fallen down - Her mother was also given blow on her right leg and her leg on account of the said blow got fractured - Held, no material infirmity or contradiction which can be said to be material in this regard and, therefore, accused no.14 could have been held guilty and has rightly been held guilty. This finding recorded by the learned trial Judge holding accused no.14 guilty for the charge of offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is not found sustainable. Accused no.14 has not been convicted for the injuries sustained by complainant - When accused no.14 has not been held guilty for the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114 or 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in absence of any acquittal appeal by the respondent-State, accused no.14 obviously would get acquittal because he is not found responsible for causing any fatal injury to the deceased - When accused no.14 has not been held guilty for the charge of offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code for causing injury either to complainant or deceased, it would not be either legal or appropriate for the Court to link the accused with the offence punishable under other than Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code - It would not be either legal or appropriate for the Court to link the accused with the offence punishable under other than Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code - It is not possible to uphold the judgment and order of conviction - Order accordingly .

JUDGMENT :

C.K. Buch, J.

Criminal Appeal No.523 of 1997 is preferred by the appellants-orig. accused no.8-Jina Vershi and orig. accused no.14-Khoda Vershi (hereinafter referred to as 'accused no.8 and accused no.14' respectively) challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st March 1997, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, in Sessions Case No.39 of 1995, whereby the learned trial Judge at the end of trial has convicted accused no.8 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted accused no.14 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Judge has sentenced each accused no.8-Jina Vershi and accused no.14-Khoda Vershi to undergo imprisonment for life and each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused no.8-Jina Vershi is further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month, so far as offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned.

2. Criminal Appeal No.532 of 1997 is preferred by the appellants-orig.accused no.5-Dashrath Okha and orig. accused no.10-Chatur Harji (hereinafter referred to as 'accused no.5 and accused no.10' respectively) challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st March 1997, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, in Sessions Case No.39 of 1995, whereby the learned trial Judge at the end of trial has convicted accused nos.5 and 10 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the accused nos.5 and 10 are further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and each to them to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine each of them is sentenced to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month, so far as offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned.

3. Criminal Appeal No.539 of 1997 is preferred by the appellant-orig.accused no.3-Dharamshi Harji (hereinafter referred to as 'accused no.3') challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st March 1997, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, in Sessions Case No.39 of 1995, whereby the learned trial Judge at the end of trial has convicted accused no.3 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Total 15 persons have been prosecuted for various offences for the incident occurred on 28th February 1995 at 07-00 p.m. in village Odu, Tal. Patdi, Dist. Surandranagar. All these accused were arrested for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 read with Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. As per the case of the prosecution, all the 14 accused persons were the members of the unlawful assembly and most of them were holding deadly weapons in their hands and they had cornered and assaulted Dharamshi Bhikha. On account of the blows inflicted upon him, Dharamshi Bhikha-brother of the complainant-Kaliben Bhikhabhai, had died on the site, more particularly on account of the blows inflicted on his head-the most vital part of the body. The accused simultaneously caused injuries to the complainant-

          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