NANUBHAI @ NANJIBHAI BACHUBHAI BARIYA vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 225 of 2010 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================
NANUBHAI @ NANJIBHAI BACHUBHAI BARIYA....Appellant(s)
Versus STATE OF GUJARAT....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. MRUDUL M BAROT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MS CM SHAH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
No. 1 ================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 20/11/2013

Advocates:
['MRUDUL M BAROT', '', 'HCLS COMMITTEE', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR']

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)

1. This is an appeal by the appellant, who was original accused No.1 in Sessions Case No. 62 of 2006, whereby, he has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Second Fast Track Judge, Amreli, Dated : 11.02.2009, rendered in the aforesaid Sessions Case, convicting and sentencing him as under;

(1) For the offence under Section 302 of the IPC to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year;

(2) For the offence under Section 307 of the IPC to undergo imprisonment for rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months;

(3) For the offence under Section 323 of the IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution, as set out before the trial Court, reads as under, 3. A complaint came to be lodged by the complainant-P.W.-1 before the ASI at Amreli Hospital on 10.04.2006, wherein, he stated that he is residing at the address given in the complaint along with his grandfather and the son of his grandfather, namely Kalubhai, and his wife, namely Bhanuben. The complainant, then, went on to narrate the alleged offence stating that on the previous day of the alleged offence, a fire took place in the thorny fence of the accused persons and keeping grudge on account of the same, all the accused went to the house of the accused, armed with deadly weapons, and inflicted injuries on the complainant and the others. Later on, while the complainant and the injured were being taken to hospital in a vehicle, the deceased Bhanuben succumbed to her injuries. On registration of the offence, police carried out the investigation and on finding, prima facie evidence against the accused, laid a charge-sheet against them, and then, the case was committed before the competent Court at Amreli, for trial. At the time of trial, the accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the accused were tried for the alleged offence.

4. To bring home the charges leveled against the accused, the prosecution examined the following witnesses;

PROSECUTION WITNESS NUMBER	NAME OF THE WITNESS	EXHIBIT NO.
1	Jagdish Kanubhai Charola	34
2	Kalubhai Mohanbhai Chauhan	36
3	Allauddinbhai Kasubhai	65
4	Gulmohmed Sulemanbhai Makrani	67
5	Haresh Govindbhai Gohil	69
6	Chitharbhai Dulabhai Baraiya	70
7	Bhagabhai Nanubhai	80
8	Mehulbhai Kalubhai Chauhan	82
9	Dr. Pareshbhai Nathubhai Gamara	84
10	Dr. Kamlesh Vrajlal Vitthalpara	94
11	Dr. Pinakin Ranchhodbhai Patel	101
12	Rahimbhai Gulmohmmed	119
13	Vinodrai Kandas Tilawat	123
14	Naransinh Kishansinh Chauhan	124
15	Gambhirsinh Tapubha Jadeja	138

5. Apart from the aforesaid oral evidence, the prosecution also placed reliance on the following documentary evidences in support of its case;

SR. NO.	PARTICULARS OF THE DOCUMENTS	EXHIBIT NO.
1	Complaint	35
2	Panchnama of Place of offence	66

3	Panchnama of discovery of ‘Bhalu’	68
4	Inquest Panchnama	72
5	Panchnama of seizure of clothes from the deadbody	73
6	Report of FSL, Junagarh	78
7	Injury certificate of Kalubhai Mohanbhai issued by Hospital at Rajkot	88
8	Injury certificate of Jagdish Kanubhai issued by Hospital at Rajkot	98
9	Notification prohibiting carrying of arms	99
10	PM Note	115
11	Map of place of offence	140
12	Serological report	143

6. At the end of the trial, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. came to be recorded, and then, the trial Court passed the judgment and order, as referred to herein above. Hence, the present appeal.

7. Heard, Mr. Barot, learned Counsel for the appellant, and Ms. Shah, learned APP, on behalf of the respondent-State.

8. In order to establish that the death of Bhanuben was homicidal one, the prosecution examined the doctor, who had performed PM on the body of the deceased as, P.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document