ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER)

1. The appellants-ori. Accused no. 1 & 2 have preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.10.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Bharuch in Sessions Case No. 39/2007, whereby, the learned trial Judge has convicted the appellants- ori. Accused no. 1 & 2 under sec. 498A of IPC and sentenced them to undergo S/I for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo further S/I for three months. The appellants – ori. Accused no. 1 & 2 are convicted for the offence under section 201 read with sec. 114 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo S/I for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to undergo further S/I for three months. The appellants – ori. Accused no. 1 and 2 are convicted for the offence under sec. 302 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo R/I for 30 days, which is impugned in this appeal.

2.1 The case of the prosecution is that on 5.12.2006 in the evening, the original accused no. 2 wentr to Nabipur Police Station along with her son and gave a janvajog application ex. 68 disclosing that her daughter-in-law, wife of accused no. 1, was missing since morning. Same was noted down by the police and started investigation. Meanwhile on 7.12.2006, since a dead body was found from the river Narmadda, village Zanore, the brother along with other relatives of the deceased went there and identified the said dead body as that of his sister Banuben. He, therefore, lodged the complaint against the husband and mother-in-law of the deceased (ori. Accused no. 1 and 2 respectively) for the offences punishable under Secs. 498-A, 306 and 304-B of IPC. Said complaint has been registered as Nabipur Police Station CR NO. I-96 of 2006 and police started investigation, prepared inquest panchnama,filled up marnotar form and made arrangements for sending dead body for carrying out post mortem to General Hospital, Bharuch. The panel doctors at General Hospital performed postmortem and gave opinion that it is not a case of suicide but a homicidal death as there is injury on the vaginal part of the victim. The Investigating Officer therefore added sec. 302 of IPC and informed the concerned Magistrate to that effect and started further investigation. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of various witnesses and interrogated all the accused. Meanwhile, he prepared panchnama of scene of offence and as the present appellant expressed willingness to show and produce the weapon iron rod alleged to have been used in the commission of offence, he called two panchas to police station and prepared primary panchnama there itself.

2.3 The appellants accused came to be arraigned for committing murder. The investigation being complete, the charge-sheet was laid against the present appellants. The case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, which was given number as Sessions Case No. 39/2007.

2.4 Thereafter, the Sessions Court framed the charge below Exh. 5 against the appellants for commission of the offence under section 302, 498-A, 304-B, 201 read with section 114 of IPC. The appellants-accused have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

2.5 To prove the case against the present appellants, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses whose evidence is read before this Court by the learned advocate for the appellant.

1. Raisingbhai Bhagvanbhai Machhi Ex. 11

2. Rasidaben Nashir Husenkha Ex. 13

3. Mubarakbhai Musabhai Bocha Ex. 16

4. Gulambhai Musabhai Patel Ex. 25

5. Valibhai Ibrahimbhai Ex. 30 6. Ramanbhai Govindbhai Ex. 31

7. Hasmukhbhai Ishvarbhai Solanki E. 33 8. Abdulbhai Ahmadbhai Dhokadiya Ex. 38

9. Idrishbhai RasulbhaiGhanchi Ex. 43

10. Umarbhai Abdulbhai Ghanch