DASHRATHBHAI NAHTABHAI BILVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for short), has been directed against the judgment and order of conviction dtd. 31/8/2012 rendered by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Dahod in Sessions Case No.30 of 2012, whereby the appellant - accused has been convicted for the offence under Ss. 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant - accused is ordered to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of ?15,000/-, and in default of fine, is ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months and is ordered to undergo three years imprisonment for the offence under Sec. 201 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of ?500/-, and in default of fine, is ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment of three months.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under : ASI, Mahendrasinh Rathod, Garbada Police Station, PW4, lodged an FIR on 4/1/2012, in which it has been mainly stated that the accidental death entry No.1 of 2012 came to be registered at the instance of Keshavbhai Nanjibhai Parmar. After registration of the said accidental death entry, an inquiry was conducted under Sec. 174 of the Code. The information was given by the said person that dead-body of the child (boy) is seen lying in a Well of Dhola Data Faliya. Thereafter, an inquiry under Sec. 174 of the Code was entrusted to the said person i.e. Mahendrasinh Rathod, ASI, Garbada Police Station. A dead- body of the deceased was taken out from the Well, inquest panchnama was prepared and thereafter, postmortem was conducted. The photographs of the dead-body was clicked, scene of offence panchnama was also carried out and the statements of the witnesses residing in nearby periphery were also recorded. It is further stated that with the help of the photographs of the dead body, inquiry was being conducted at village : Nadhelav at Dhul Mahendi Faliya. It is further stated that statement of one Narsingbhai Bhuriya was recorded. It was revealed that the photograph shown to him was of boy named Devraj, who was the grand-son of the said witness. He has stated that the deceased was in company of his son-in-law (present appellant - accused). The appellant approached him and told him to keep Devraj. Upon denying the son-in-law of the said witness i.e. present appellant,, left in the company of the deceased. Thereafter, the statement of the appellant - accused was recorded who has confessed before the first informant by stating that deceased is his son begotten out of relationship between him and his second wife - Humliben. It is further stated that on 30/12/2011, as on account of divorce agreement prepared and executed between him, the custody of his son was handed over to him by Humliben, however, the first wife of the appellant - accused was not ready to keep the deceased with her, on 31/12/2011, when the appellant - accused visited the house of the father-in-law - Narsingbhai Bhuriya in order to drop him at the said place, the said witness was not agreeable to keep the custody of the deceased and therefore, the appellant - accused went towards the Well at village : Abhlod at around 08:00 a.m. and thereafter, his son was thrown into a Well. Thus, on the basis of the said information, the FIR came to be registered by the ASI Mr. Rathod.

(3.) After registration of the FIR, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and recorded the statements of the witnesses. The Investigating Officer collected the relevant material during course of investigation and thereafter, filed charge-sheet against the appellant - accused before the concerned Magistrate Court. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the concerned Magistrate Court committed the case to the learned Sessions Court, Dahod, where it was registered as Sessions Case No.30 of 2012.