Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Ilesh J. Vora, S.V. Pinto, JJ.
Laxmanbhai Khodabhai Senva – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal Appeal (Against Conviction) No. 943 of 2015
Decided On : 14-10-2024
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order dated 7.10.2014 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda @ Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as the “learned trial court”) in Sessions Case No. 36 of 2014. The appellant is referred to as the accused as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under.
2.1 As per the case of the prosecution, the accused was living with his wife, Masooriben in Bhathiji Faliya of village Ladwa and on 28.06.2013 at about 7:30 hours when they were at home, the accused had a doubt that his wife Masooriben had an affair with one Vikrambhai Bhalabhai Thakore, and he asked his wife where she had got the new sari from and had a quarrel with his wife. At that time, the accused got enraged and took a chopper and a knife and caused injuries on the chest and over the stomach of his wife and strangulated her and caused her death. The accused came to the Kathlal Police Station and filed the complaint before the PSI, Kathlal Police Station which was registered at CR No.93 of 2013 under Section 302 of the IPC on 28.06.2013.
2.2 The Investigating Officer visited the place of offence and drew the necessary panchnama and sent the dead body of deceased Masooriben for post-mortem, seized the necessary muddamal and recorded the statements of the connected witnesses, arrested the accused and filed the chargesheet before the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kathlal. As the case was exclusively triable by the learned Sessions Court by a committal order passed under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was committed to the Sessions Court Kheda @ Nadiad which was registered as Sessions Case No.36 of 2014.
2.3 The accused was produced before the learned trial court and after it was verified that the procedure under section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was followed, a charge at exhibit 5 was framed against the accused, and the statement of the accused was recorded at exhibit 6 wherein the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution produced the following oral and documentary evidence in support of their case.
| WITNESSES | ||
| Sr No. | NAME | EXHIBIT |
| 1. | Ashishbhai Arvindbhai Modi | 8 |
| 2. | Patel Dhananjay Maganbhai | 11 |
| 3. | Maniben Khodabhai Senva | 14 |
| 4. | Jayantibhai Khodabhai Senva | 15 |
| 5. | Shantaben Mafatbhai Luhar | 16 |
| 6. | Laxmanbhai Kalabhai Parmar | 18 |
| 7. | Satarbhai Ismailbhai Vohra | 22 |
| 8. | Pravinkumar Kantilal Shah | 26 |
| 9. | Chimanbhai Shanabhai Senva | 30 |
| 10. | Chhaganbhai Somabhai Senva | 35 |
| 11. | Pareshkumar Bhagwandas Khambhla | 36 |
| 12. | Solanki Rajendrasinh Indrasinh | 40 |
| DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE | ||
| SR.NO. | DESCRIPTION OF THE DOCUMENT | EXHIBIT |
| 1 | Yadi for carrying out PM of dead body. | 9 |
| 2 | Postmortem note of dead body of Masuriben Laxmanbhai Khodabhai Senva |
|
| 3 | Report of FSL Mobile van | 12 |
| 4 | Inquest panchnama | 17 |
| 5 | panchnama of scene of offence | 19 |
| 6 | panch slip of muddamal article No.1 | 20 |
| 7 | panch slip of muddamal article No.2 | 21 |
| 8 | panch slip of muddamal article No.8 | 23 |
| 9 | panch slip of muddamal article No.9 | 24 |
| 10 | panchnama of condition of the body of the accused as well as clothes. | 25 |
| 11 | panch slip of muddamal article No.6 | 27 |
| 12 | panch slip of muddamal article No.7 | 28 |
| 13 | panchnama as per Section 27 of the Evidence Act | 29 |
| 14 | panc | |
The court ruled that a confession made to a police officer is inadmissible as evidence, and the conviction for murder was reduced to culpable homicide due to lack of premeditation.
The confessional statement of the Appellant was inadmissible under Sections 24 to 27 of the Evidence Act, and the remaining evidence was insufficient to prove the Appellant's guilt beyond reasonable ....
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was not achieved in this case.
The court held that acts committed under grave and sudden provocation may reduce the charge from murder to culpable homicide, emphasizing the absence of malicious intent.
The importance of proving the contents of a panchnama and the circumstances indicating intention to cause death, as outlined in the judgment of Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy vs State of A.P.
Murder conviction upheld on circumstantial evidence via complete chain: homicidal death, last seen together, false explanation, body concealment, corroborated confessions, medical proof of fatal inju....
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Section 304 Part II IPC relates to punishment but without any intention to cause death.
The conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was upheld based on circumstantial evidence demonstrating a complete and unbroken chain leading to the appellant's guilt.
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
