CHIMANBHAI LALJIBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C. for short), the appellants, original accused Nos.1, 3, 7 & 11 have challenged the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Navsari in Sessions Case No.23/91, by which the appellants, original accused Nos.1, 3, 7 & 11 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.200/- and in default to undergo one month's simple imprisonment, for committing murder of one Gondiabhai Devjibhai, father of the complainant, in an incident which occurred on 12.10.1990 at 6.30 a.m. at village Jogvel, Tal: Dharampur, Dist: Valsad and they also came to be convicted under section 325 read with section 114 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigourous imprisonment for five years and pay amount of Rs.200/- by way of fine and in default, one month's simple imprisonment. Both sentences were directed to run concurrently. The sole question which emerges and placed in focus in this appeal is as to whether the conviction and sentence of the appellants, original accused Nos.1, 3, 7 & 11 under section 302 read with section 114 and 325 read with 114 of IPC would stand the judicial scrutiny in exercise of power under section 374 of the Cr.P.C., to which we hasten to discuss and adjudicate upon, hereinafter, after considering the factual matrix, giving rise to the appeal, at the instance of the appellants, original accused Nos.1, 3, 7 & 11 out of the 14 accused persons arraigned in Sessions Case before the Trial Court.

(2.) It would be appropriate to mention, at this stage, that in so far as involvement of appellants in the incident of 12.10.90 is concerned, the same is not seriously disputed. In other words, except the provisions of law under which the conviction and quantum of sentence could be justified, the culpability for having remained present and participated in the unfortunate incident which occurred on 12.10.90 at 6.30 a.m. has not ben controverted and pressed. Still, however, for the satisfaction of the judicial conscience, we have threadbare examined the documentary as well as vivo voce evidence, the impugned judgment and the submissions raised on behalf of both the sides and the relevant and material legal settings, in general, and the provisions of section 302, 325 and 114 of the IPC in particular.

(3.) Homicidal death of Gondiabhai Devjibhai on account of injuries sustained in the incident which occurred at about 6.30 a.m. on 12.10.1990 is, rightly, not disputed. Otherwise also, it is materially and substantially borne out from the record in general and the evidence of the Medical Officer of Dr.Dhananjay N. Patel (PW-1), Ex.19, Dr.M.N.Desai (PW-9), Ex.48, Dr.Bipinchandra L. Sakiwala (PW-15), Ex.60, Post Mortem Report (Ex.63), Inquest report and other supporting circumstances that the homicidal death of deceased Gondiabhai Devjibhai has been established by an unimpeachable evidence on record.