IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that circumstantial evidence must form a complete and unbroken chain to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

ILESH J. VORA, J.

1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-original accused under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (old) (‘Cr.P.C.’ in short) against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 05.04.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalol, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case no. 4 of 2013, wherein, the appellant came to be tried for offences punishable under Sections 302, 363, 366, 376 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (old) (‘IPC’ for short) and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 (‘G.P. Act’ in short).

2. At the end of the trial, the appellant came to be convicted under Section 302 of IPC and Section 135 of G.P. Act and was sentenced as under:

Learned Trial Court directed to undergo both the sentences concurrently.

3. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file this appeal are as under:

3.1 Deceased Shankarbhai along with her daughter aged about 15 years and other family members including his brother Jivabhai Rupabhai PW-15, came to Village Pratappura, Tal: Kalol, District Gandhinagar for labour work. There stay was at the farm, where they brought for labour work.

3.2 The appellant accused Arjun Nayak was also employed by the contractor for cutting of tree and he was living nearby the place of the deceased and his family members.

3.3 The appellant accused and daughter of the deceased aged about 15 years were acquainted and fell in love and used to meet each other. The deceased Shankarbhai had reprimanded the appellant accused and asked him to keep distance from his daughter.

3.4 Despite of this, the appellant accused did not stop and was continued in maintaining the relation with the victim.

3.5 On 03.11.2012, at about 09:00 p.m. the brother of the deceased PW-14, had prepared a rice for dinner. The deceased wanted to eat roti. So, he along with his daughter went to village to get pan [flat plat for backing bread (roti)].

3.6 The appellant accused had followed the deceased and came out with dager after a while, and when PW-14 asked, he said that he is going for outing.

3.7 When the deceased and his daughter reached near farm of Dahyabhai Chaudhary, the appellant accused, in order to take revenge, as the deceased was hurdle in maintaining relationship with her daughter, assaulted the deceased by using arm dager and had caused fatally injuries as a result of which, deceased died on the spot and thereafter, took away the victim with him and stayed at different places for about 6 to 7 days and maintained physical relationship with her.

3.8 The farm owner informed the village sarpanch about the dead body lying in his farm. The village sarpanch informed the Kalol Police Station and on the basis of the said information, the police registered the case as accidental death on 04.11.2012. On arrival of the police at the place of the incident, PW-14 brother of the deceased disclosed the FIR. The dead body of the deceased, sent for postmorterm. The I.O. recorded the statements of witnesses. The appellant accused was found in the company of the victim nearby the farm. He was arrested. The victim as well as the accused sent for medical examination. During the investigation, at the instance of the appellant accused, the weapon dager seized from the house of PW-8. The I.O. collected the blood samples of the deceased as well as the accused and seized the bloodstain cloths of the deceased and sent it to the FSL for analysis.

3.9 At the end of investigation, the I.O. found sufficient evidence against the appellant accused for the charge and accordingly, chargesheet came to be filed before the Court concerned.

4. On the basis of material on record, the charge was framed against the appellant at Exh.6, to which he pleaded not guilty and therefore, he came to be tried