VALLABH ALIAS MUNNA GOVAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by Vallabh alias Munna Govan, who was original accused No. 1 at the Sessions trial and who was convicted Under Section 304, Part I, IPC and sentenced to suffer R. I. for 7 years, by the learned Sessions Judge, Surat.

(2.) THE prosecution case was that the appellant had developed illicit intimacy with Vanita, the daughter of deceased Ghelabhai Atmaram; that Ghelabhai was adverse to their marriage and that on that account at about 10 P. M. on 9-2-60, the appellant and two others, who were accused Nos. 2 and 3 at the Sessions trial surrounded Ghelabhai and caused his death by inflicting serious injuries on him. Upon hearing the cries, Vinodchandra, the brother of the deceased and others came to the scene of offence. The deceased was taken on a cot to his house and Dr. Navalram was called. The Police Jamadar also came to the scene and recorded the complaint of Ghelabhai. Ghelabhai succumbed to his injuries on his way to a hospital. The inquest was made on 10-260 at 7 A. M. and the dead-body was sent for post-mortem examination. The three accused were arrested in the course of investigation. In due course, they were all committed to Sessions Court for trial. At the Sessions Court the prosecution did not adduce any direct evidence but they relied entirely on the circumstantial evidence, the dying declaration made by the deceased and the confessional statement made by the accused to the Taluka Magistrate on 12-2-60. In addition, they also relied on the fact that there were minor injuries on the person of the appellant.

(3.) THE appellant in his examination at the Sessions trial stated that he and accused No. 2 are. ' brothers; that he was in love with Vanita; that the deceased himself was saying that he would murder the appellant; and that on 9-2-60 at about 7-30 or 8 P. M. Ghelabhai, the deceased, gave blows to the appellant. From there the appellant went home and as he learnt that the deceased was to murder him, he went to one Lallubhai, who is a respectable man, accompanied by the accused Nos. 2 and 3; that on the way near the butcher's shop, deceased Ghelabhai came and gave 2 to 3 blows with an iron pipe on his chest and back; that thereupon his brother, accused No. 2, and accused No. 3, left the place and Ghelabhai came again to beat the appellant with the iron pipe; and that the appellant requested him not to beat him. In spite of that, the deceased gave him one blow and said that he would be quiet only after murdering him. The appellant snatched away trie irorf-pipe. The deceased then took out a knife; the appellant tried to assault Ghelabhai with the iron-pipe on his wrist and ft struck oil his head. Ghelabhai fell down. The appellant then tried to snatch away the knife from the hand of Ghelabhai, during which the appellant got an injury near his little finger. The appellant snatched away the knife; Ghelabhai gave a push as a result of which he fell down. In the act of struggle for a knife, two or three times knife might have injured Ghelabhai. In the struggle, the appellant might have been injured by the knife twice or thrice on his back. Ghelabhai held his hand in which there was a knife and forcibly took his hand towards the shoulder. The appellant tried to get out of the grip and during that struggle, the knife injured Ghelabhai near his clavicle. Ghelabhai fell down. The appellant then ran away. The chappal. Article 17, which was at the scene of offence belongs to him as it slipped away from his foot and the battery fell down from his pocket at the scene of offence.