PRAVIN @ PALIYO CHHAGANBHAI PRAJAPATI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment and order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Sessions Case No.01 of 2007 dated 02.02.2008 whereby, the appellant, original accused, is convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 of Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC") and is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/ -and in case of default in making payment of fine, the accused is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of two years.

(2.) ANTECEDENT facts of this case, which require brief mention, are these; On 28.09.2006, in the morning hours, while Chetnaben Ashwinbhai Prajapati, the complainant herein, was going to Bharuch along with her husband and children, a telephone call came on the mobile phone of her husband, Ashwinbhai Bhikhabhai Prajapati, which was made by one of their neighbours. They were informed that Kokilaben, the sister of complainant along with two of her children, named, Amit, aged around 06 years and Nikul, aged about two years, have sustained burn injuries and that Amit died on the spot whereas, injured -Kokilaben and son -Nikul have been admitted at Bharuch Civil Hospital. The complainant, therefore, immediately rushed to the Hospital. On inquiry, the complainant came to know that in the history given before the Doctor during treatment, injured -Kokilaben had informed that while she was feeding her son -Nikul in the morning, the appellant sprinkled kerosene over them and set her ablaze.

(3.) MR . Harnish Darji learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant -accused submitted that the Court below committed serious error in law and on facts in convicting the appellant for the alleged offence. He submitted that there are no eyewitness to the alleged incident and that the appellant has been falsely implicated. He submitted that all the three deceased died an accidental death resulting from malfunctioning of kerosene stove kept in the kitchen during which time deceased -Kokilaben was preparing food. He, therefore, submitted that the Court below ought to have acquitted the appellant of the charge by granting him the benefit of doubt.