LAWS(GJH)-2002-4-117

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHIKHUBHAI MANILAL GHUNCHALA

Decided On April 15, 2002
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
BHIKHUBHAI MANILAL GHUNCHALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Application for cancellation of bail is filed by the applicant-State of Gujarat against the impugned judgment and order dated 11.1.2002 passed by Shri V.B.Mayani, Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.23 of 2002 filed by the respondents-accused releasing them on bail on certain terms and conditions mentioned in it in connection with CR No. 5/02 registered with Jamnagar City 'A' Division Police Station for the offences under Sections 306, 114 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) and Section 3(2)(5) of the Atrocities Act.

(2.) Complainant-Govabhai Khengabhai Vaghela belonging to Scheduled Caste community of "Chamar" lodged FIR at early morning hours at 3.15 a.m. on 3.1.2002 with Jamnagar A Division Police Station against the respondents-accused for the offences punishable under Section 302 r.w.s.114 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of Atrocities Act for committing murder of his young daughter-Shilpa @Shital, who is hardly 19 years, working in the factory of the respondent-accused No. 1-Bhikhubhai Manilal Ghunchala alleging that his daughter was burnt alive in the room of factory premises of respondent No.l with the help of his wife i.e. respondent No.2- accused-Madhuben. It was stated in the complaint that his daughter refused to go to work at Bhikhabhai's place because of his character and behaviour towards her. The incident alleged to have taken place on the previous day i.e. on 2.1.2002 in the afternoon hours at about 2.00 p.m. Thus, there was a delay of about 13 hours in lodging FIR.

(3.) Initially, the complaint was investigated by Dy. S.P. Shri C.C.Rajput, which was later on entrusted to Shri R.M.Pandey. After taking over investigation from Shri Rajput, Shri Pandey carried out investigation and after recording statements of several witnesses, including Manjulaben and Jayesh, came to the conclusion that in this case offence under Section 306 is made out and not under section 302 IPC. Accordingly, he arrested both the respondents-accused for the offences under Sections 306, 114 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) and Section 3(2)(5) of the Atrocities Act.