IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ILESH J. VORA, S.V. PINTO, JJ.
Lalabhai Punambhai Beldar & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (Against Conviction) No. 1344 of 2014 With Criminal Misc.application (For Temporary Bail) No. 4 of 2024 In R/Criminal Appeal No. 1344 of 2014
Decided On : 20-01-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 324, 325, 504, 506(2) - Gujarat Police Act - Section 135 - Conviction appeal by original accused nos. 2 and 3 against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 03.09.2014 - Convicted for murder and causing voluntary injuries - The trial court found that the appellants, armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the deceased and witnesses due to a land dispute, resulting in fatal injuries. (Paras 1, 2.1, 4, 20, 22)
(B) Principle of Parity - The court cannot convict one accused and acquit another when there is similar or identical evidence against them - The trial court's conviction of the appellants was justified despite the acquittal of co-accused due to differing evidence. (Paras 13, 22)
(C) Medical Evidence - The injuries sustained by the deceased were sufficient to cause death, and the appellants acted with intent to kill, fulfilling the criteria for murder under Section 300 of IPC. (Paras 21, 22)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of Manubhai Beldar and causing injuries to his son Kamlesh Beldar and others during a land dispute. The deceased succumbed to injuries after being assaulted with deadly weapons. (Paras 1, 2.1)
Findings of Court:
The trial court's conviction of the appellants was upheld, confirming that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 22, 23)
Issues: The main issues included the validity of the conviction based on the principle of parity and the sufficiency of evidence linking the appellants to the murder. (Paras 13, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence of the injured eyewitness was credible and corroborated by medical evidence, establishing the appellants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 20, 22)
Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld.
JUDGMENT :
ILESH J. VORA, J.
1. This conviction appeal is filed by the appellants –original accused nos.2 and 3, against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.09.2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Sessions Case No.25 of 2013, wherein the appellants came to be tried for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 324, 325, 504, 506(2) of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. At the end of the trial, the appellants came to be convicted and sentenced as tabulated hereunder:
| Conviction under Section | Sentence of imprisonment | Fine |
| S.302 of IPC | Life imprisonment | Rs.5000/-, in default to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment |
| S.323 of IPC | 3 months simple imprisonment | Rs.500/- in default to undergo 10 days simple imprisonment |
| S.324 of IPC | 6 months simple imprisonment | Rs.1000/- in default to undergo 30 days simple imprisonment |
| S.325 of IPC | 18 months simple imprisonment | Rs.500/- in default to undergo 30 days simple imprisonment |
The Trial Court ordered the sentences imposed on the appellants to run concurrently.
2. The case of the prosecution leading to conviction of the appellants accused is as follows:
2.1 On 25.11.2012, at about 21:30 p.m., FIR being C.R.No.48 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 324, 325, 504, 506(2) of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, was lodged at Limbasi Police Station, Village: Hadeva, Tal.: Matar, Dist.:Kheda, according to which, the PW:16 Kamlesh Beldar and his father Manubhai Beldar were going to Village Limbasi and while passing near the Village Lake, the co-accused viz. Deva Beldar, Lala Beldar, Vitthal Popat and Manga Gafur, armed with deadly weapons like scythe (dhariya) and wooden stick, restrained them and raising the issue of the property in question, assaulted fatally. The PW:16 was assaulted by accused Deva Beldar and the injury was being caused by wooden stick on his left hand, whereas, accused Lala Beldar, Vitthal Popat and Manga Gafur, mercilessly assaulted Manubhai and serious injuries on his head as well as right leg being caused with the weapon dhariya as each of was having dhariya weapon in his hand. The accused Lala Beldar appellant herein caused injury on the head by inflicting dhariya and accused Vitthal Popat inflicted blows on the right leg of the deceased which resulted into multiple fractures. The accused Manga Gafur gave a blow on the right ear of the deceased with dhariya. According to the case of the prosecution, after the incident of assault on the PW:16 and his father Manubhai, the other accused nos.5 to 11, came in the support of principal accused nos.1 to 4 and the injured witnesses who came in the rescue of the PW:16 Kamleshbhai and Manubhai Beldar had been seriously injured by the accused nos.5 to 12. The witnesses were the family members of the injured Kamleshbhai. The witnesses viz. Rekhaben Beldar PW:18, Jigiben Beldar PW:19, Kunvarben Beldar PW:20 and Manjulaben Beldar PW:21 and Kamuben Beldar sustained grievous injuries in the said incident allegedly caused by the accused nos.5 to 12 and accused Vitthal Popat the appellant herein. After the incident, the accused fled away from the place of the incident. The injured including the deceased had been taken to the nearby Civil Hospital and thereafter, they referred to Ahmedabad Civil Hospital. The condition of the injured Manubhai was serious as after sustaining the head injuries, he almost went into coma. Deceased Manubhai was operated for the open Grade-II fracture injuries of tibia and fibula and operation fixation was done. He was also treated for the puncture wounds. The deceased Manubhai, for his better treatment, shifted to private hospital at Kheda, Nadiad and during the treatment, he succumbed to his injuries on 29.11.2012.
Initially, the offence was registered under Section307, etc. and after the passing away of Manubhai, the charge of murder under Section 302 being added with the permission of the Court. The Investigating Officer PW
The court upheld the conviction for murder, emphasizing that the evidence of the injured eyewitness was credible and corroborated by medical findings, establishing intent to kill.
A conviction cannot stand when there are significant contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, raising doubts about the prosecution's case.
The reliability of the injured eye-witnesses' testimony and its corroboration by medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Conviction under Sections 302 and 326 of IPC requires credible ocular evidence, with emphasis on eyewitness credibility, especially from injured parties, establishing guilt despite differing roles am....
Murder – Exaggerated devotion to rule of benefit of doubt must not nurture fanciful doubts letting guilty escape is not doing justice, according to law.
Existence of credible eyewitness accounts can uphold conviction despite the absence of independent witnesses, particularly in cases involving known disputes. Intent and specific language for provocat....
The appellants' conviction for murder was altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of intent, despite their involvement in the unlawful assembly and rioting.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.