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

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1847

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Ilesh J. Vora, P. M. Raval, JJ.
Chhaganbhai Malsingbhai Rathwa – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Misc.Application (For Regular Bail) No. 2 of 2025 In R/Criminal Appeal No. 1532 of 2023
Decided On : 01-10-2025

Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:Mr.Darshan A. Dave For the Respondent: Mr L B Dabhi, APP

Suspension of sentence pending appeal in serious offences requires careful consideration of evidence and potential for acquittal, particularly in light of questionable witness reliability and inconsistencies in verdicts among co-accused.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 201, 120

(B), 452, 506(2) - Conviction for murder and other related offences - The applicant was sentenced for life imprisonment and fines for multiple convictions, including murder and destruction of evidence, following a brutal killing - The prosecution's reliance on a child eye-witness was critically examined, with conclusions regarding the lack of corroborating evidence - Suspension of sentence pending appeal granted due to doubts over witness reliability and potential for acquittal - Court found that the circumstances warranted suspension as the other co-accused were acquitted on similar evidence. (Paras 1, 2, 10, 12, 13, and 14)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Suspension of Sentence - The court emphasized that suspension of sentence in serious offences necessitates a careful analysis of evidence and apprehension of the potential for appeal success, guarding against routine orders. (Paras 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The accused was convicted for the murder of Reshliben, involving gruesome acts, including decapitation and subsequent disposal of evidence, supported primarily by testimony from a child witness, whose reliability was questioned.

Findings of Court:
The court recognized the shaky nature of evidence, particularly from the child witness, and noted the acquittal of co-accused, leading to a decision to suspend the sentence during the appeal.

Issues: The primary questions revolved around the reliability of the key eye-witness, implications of evidence presented, and ruling on suspension of the sentence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court asserted that the presence of substantial doubts regarding witness credibility and the circumstances leading to co-accused acquittals necessitated suspension of the sentence until the appeal could be heard thoroughly.

Result: Suspension of sentence granted, allowing the accused to be released on bail during the appeal.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and charges (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments from both sides regarding conviction (Para 7 , 8)
3. court's analysis of arguments and evidence (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. decision on suspension of sentence (Para 13 , 14 , 15)

ORDER :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

1. The original accused No.1, Chhhaganbhai Malsingbhai Rathwa, who has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default 6 months SI and also convicted for offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC for 7 years RI and fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default, 3 months SI and also convicted for the offence under section 120(B) of the IPC for 6 months RI and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default 3 months SI and for offence punishable under Section 452 of IPC 7 years RI and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default for 3 months SI, is before this Court against the judgment and order of conviction by way of present appeal and has also preferred an application for suspension of sentence pending the appeal.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution is as under:-

2.1 On 26/11/2018 at around 7:00 PM where the deceased Reshliben along with her Niece Sunita Ramesh Rathwa were sleeping in her home at village Bhorda and at night, the present applicant with 2 other persons Kamlesh Rathwa and Mukesh Rathwa with preplanned intention and planning break-in the house of the deceased illegally from the ventilation present at the backside of the house of the complainant and they cut off the head of the deceased Reshliben with some sharp weapon and also made some injury on the fingers of both the hands. Subsequently, the deceased died spontaneously and they took the head of the deceased with them and buried the head of the deceased at some place.

2.2 That when the informant was at his home, where he received a call from Raisinghbhai Tersinghbhai Rathwa who is son of his father's sister i.e deceased Reshliben where he stated that "Someone has cut off my mother's head and taken it away with him and that he was informed about this incident by Bhersingbhai Runiyabhai Rathwa of village Bhorda who called him on his phone. Subsequently he told the complainant to visit his home" Hence, the complainant along with his uncle's son Kalubhai Sukhliyabhai and Bhuvanbhai Guliyabhai went to the deceased home where they saw that near bed someone with some sharp weapon has cut off the head of the deceased Reshliben and there were blood stains on her whole body and they also saw injury on the fingers of both the hands and took the head of the deceased with them. When the said incident happened, the niece of the deceased Sunita Ramesh Rathwa was also sleeping besides the deceased, she informed the informant that the killers also threatened to kill her. Hence the complaint was lodged before the Rangpur Police Station.

3. Therefore, on 26/11/2018 the FIR was registered at Rangpur Police Station vide C.R. No. 1-51 of 2018 for the offences punishable u/s. 302, 201, 120(B), 452, 506(2) read with section 114 of IPC.

4. The investigation proceeded and the Investigating Officer filed a charge-sheet against the applicant and other accused before the learned CJM, Chhota Udepur for the offences punishable u/s. 302, 201, 120(B), 452, 506(2) read with Section 114 of IPC on 16/02/2019, which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 235 of 2019. As the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the Ld. CJM committed the case before the Sessions Court as per the provisions of Section 209 of Cr.P.C.

5. The aforesaid case came to be registered as Sessions Case No. 19 of 2019 and it came to be transferred to the Ld. Sessions Judge, Chhota Udepur for trial. The charge was framed against the appellant and another accused for the offences punishable u/s. 302, 201, 120(B), 452, 506(2) read with 114 of IPC. Thereafter the prosecution examined 17 witnesses and relied upon 47 documentary evidences.

6. Thereafter, arguments were heard and the judgment and order below E

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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