STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KISHORBHAI KHIMABHAI DANGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the applicant State. This application is filed by the State under Sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking leave to challenge the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 17/3/2023 passed by the learned 4 th Additional Sessions Judge, Vanthali in Criminal Case No.17 of 2018 (Old Case No.2 of 2013). By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge has given benefit of doubt to respondent accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 306, 323, 504 and 506(2) read with Sec. 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Mr. Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has invited attention of this Court to the manner in which the incident had taken place. He has further invited attention of this Court to the issues framed before the trial Court and has submitted that upon appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution, more particularly, medical evidence which has come on record, the learned Sessions Judge has accepted the case of the prosecution about unnatural death of the deceased complainant who had succumbed to the consuming of poison. The attention of this Court was invited to the dying declaration of the original complainant, wherein, he had specifically averred about the incident dtd. 30/6/2012. The complainant had alleged that present respondent - original accused no.1 had assaulted him and was administered threat to the demand of 25% interest being made by the respondent-accused against hand loan of an amount of Rs.50,000.00, failing which, the respondent -accused had threatened to cause physical assault upon the complainant including the family members. He further submitted that after four days of such incident, the complainant had consumed poison and he was hospitalized immediately and was transferred to the private hospital for better treatment. Mr. Soni has relied upon the dying declaration which was recorded before Executive Magistrate who has been examined as one of the witness. Thus, the prosecution has proved the dying declaration. However, the learned Sessions Judge has ignored the aforesaid evidence and has proceeded to give benefit of doubt to respondent accused by passing impugned order of acquittal. He, therefore, urge this Court to consider leave to appeal.

(3.) Having heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and considering the submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and grounds raised in the memo of appeal, prima facie the appeal filed by the State requires consideration.