STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MOHANLAL KUBERDAS UPADHYAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these matters arise out of the order of conviction and sentence passed by the court of the Additional Sessions Judge Kaira at Nadiad in Sessions Case No. 102/73 of his file under secs. 302 307 and 324 I.P.C. and secs. 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. For the offence under sec. 302 the appellant-accused is sentenced to death subject to the confirmation by this court. For the offence under sec. 307 I.P.C. he is sentenced to R.I. of 10 years for the offence under sec. 324 I.P.C. to R.I. of 3 years for the offence under sec. 3 of the Explosive Substances Act to the R.I. of 10 years and for the offence under sec. 5 of the said Act to the R.I. of 5 years. The learned Judge has ordered all these substantive sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) Short facts of the case are as under. The appellant accused is serving as a sepoy in the Indian Army. He is said to have taken leave from his services from 12th April 1972 and then extended the said leave and ultimately resumed his duties on 19th July 1972 He belongs to Namnar village situated in Panchmahal District of this State and was expected to join his service somewhere on the border between India and Pakistan.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that the accused somehow obtained the possession of three live hand grenades manufactured in Pakistan and brought these bombs with him when he came on leave on 12th April 1972 It is said that the accused bore some enmity against prosecution witness Dhulabhai Gokalbhai and two other persons named Devendra Keshrisinh and Manilal Joshi It is said that in order to take his vengence against the three persons the accused before joining his military service went to Kirtistambh post office at Palanpur on 18th July 1972 and posted three unregistered parcels each to the above name three persons. Accord ing to the prosecution each of three parcels contained a live hand grenade bomb which he had brought from the border. All the three parcels contained the name of and address of the sender as Dhiraj P. Rajput A.P.C. Bhuj. When the parcel which was addressed to witness Deveodra was delivered to him he found that the sender Dhiraj P. Rajput of Bhuj was not known to him and therefore he refused to take delivery of the said parcel. When the second parcel which was addressed to Manilal Joshi was delivered to him he received the same but on opening it he found that some fumes were coming out of it and therefore he was advised to throw it away. Manilal threw away that parcel and immediately the hand grenade bomb which it contained exploded near his house. So far as these two parcels are concerned the police have filed separate cases against the accused and for the purpose of the instant case we are not concerned with these two cases.