LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-1490

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHARATBHAII DURLABHBHAI PARMAR

Decided On April 27, 2022
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Bharatbhaii Durlabhbhai Parmar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 30/6/1994 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Navsari in Sessions Case No.26 of 1991 for the offences under Ss. 302, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the applicant - State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal as provided under sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for short) inter alia challenging the judgment and order of acquittal in favour of the respondents accused.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that, Durlabbhai Bhagabhai and others - the accused had bitten one Naginbhai on 12/12/1990 as he has intervened in the dispute between Durlabhbhai Bhagabhai and Chhaganbhai Bhagabhai. On 14/12/1990, the accused had gone to the house of said Naginbhai and used abusive language to his wife - Shardaben. The deceased - Gambhirbhai was a neighbour and therefore, he stopped the accused and told them not to use such language. The accused were provoked and as they were armed with sticks, gave stick blows to the deceased - Gambhirbhai. Due to that, Gambhirbhai received serious injuries on head and other parts of the body and ultimately, he succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, the complainant - Shantaben, wife of Gambhirbhai lodged the complaint with regard to the incident before the Chikhli Police Station, which was registered as I-C.R. No. 201 of 1990, for the offences under Ss. 302, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(3.) In pursuance of the complaint lodged by the complainant, investigating agency recorded statements of the witnesses, collected relevant evidence in form of medical evidence and drawn various Panchnamas and other relevant evidence for the purpose of proving the offence. After having found material against the respondents accused, charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chikhli. As said Court lacks jurisdiction to try the offence, it committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Navsari as provided under sec. 209 of the Code.