NATVARBHAI KALIDAS CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment and order passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 18, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 195 of 2002 dated 28.11.2003 whereby, the appellant, original accused, was convicted for the offences punishable u/s. 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC"). For conviction u/s. 302 IPC, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/ and in case of default, he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further period of six months. Whereas, for conviction u/s. 201 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.2000/ and in case of default, he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The accused was given the benefit of setoff.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the appellant herein got married to Champaben some where in the year 2000 and was residing with her in the slums known as Kumbharni Chali situated near Sarangpur area of Ahmedabad City. It was alleged that Champaben was having illicit relationship with one Shankar prior to her marriage with the appellant and that she would be fleeing with him shortly. When the appellant asked Champaben to discontinue her alleged relationship with Shankar, she refused to budge. The appellant, therefore, got enraged and on 13.04.2002, at around 1100 hrs., he done her to death by suffocating her with a rope. Thereafter, the appellant buried Champaben in his own house after digging around 3 ft. deep pit. He later went to Amraiwadi Police Station and disclosed the crime. A complaint vide IC.R. No. 151/2002 was registered and necessary investigation was carried out. At the end of investigation, chargesheet was filed before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate but, as the case was sessions triable, it was committed to the Sessions Court, Ahmedabad.

(3.) HOWEVER , we find that the aforesaid decision shall not be of any help to the appellant in view of the subsequent decision of this Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.1066/2006 dated 25.07.2012 wherein, it has been held that appeal filed by an accused, who is absconding, can be heard and decided on merits. We concur with the subsequent decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court and follow the principle laid down therein. Accordingly, we have heard learned counsel Mr. Pratik Barot appearing on behalf of the appellant on merits.