BIRENDRAKUMAR MAHGURAM SHARMA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellant, original accused, has challenged the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Valsad, in Sessions Case No.60/2005 dated 31.07.2007, whereby, the appellant herein, original accused, has been convicted for life imprisonment for the offence punishable u/s.302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC") and fine of Rs. 500/, in default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo further sentence of simple imprisonment for three months. The appellant has been acquitted for the charge u/s.135 of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of this case are that the complaintSunil Shrichandram Sharma, was earning his livelihood by running a Saloon in front of his house along with three other members, namely Harinandan Kishan Ram, who happens to be the nephew of his brother, Ramjanam Dahchandram Sharma, who happens to be the son of his paternal uncle and Akhilesh, who happens to be his cousin. On 18.4.2005, Ramjanam Dahchandram Sharma did not go for work and was present in the house. At around 6:00 pm. while the complainant was present in his shop, Ramjanam left house. On inquiring by the present appellant about his visit, he did not gave any reply and left the place.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court has passed the impugned judgment and order without appreciating the evidence on record. He further submitted that the incident in question had occurred in the heat of the moment, the appellant did not intent to kill the victim or to cause such grievous injuries, which shall lead to her death. He also submitted that the trial Court has not considered the fact that at the time of offence, the appellant was intoxicated. He, therefore, submitted that considering aforesaid facts, this Court may consider the case of the present appellant under section 304 (Part I) or (Part II) of IPC.