PRAVINKUMAR SOMRAJJI MEHTA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of these appeals, original accused No. 1 as well as the State have challenged the judgement and order dated 29.12.1994 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 248 of 1991 whereby the trial court has convicted and sentenced original accused No. 1 for rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and imposed fine of Rs. 1500/ -, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months under Sec. 498(A) of IPC. Criminal Appeal No. 68 of 1995 has been preferred by original accused No. 1 against the conviction whereas Criminal Appeal No. 303 of 1995 has been preferred by the State against the acquittal of original accused Nos. 1 & 2 recorded under Ss. 302 r/w 34 of IPC and acquittal of original accused No. 2 under Sec. 498(A) of IPC.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Sarojben was meted out with physical and mental torture by accused No. 1 - husband of deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased was given some poisonous substance which caused her death. The accused were apprehended and after investigation charge sheet was submitted. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The trial was initiated against the accused and during the course of trial the prosecution examined various witnesses whose evidences were read before us by learned advocates for both the sides. The prosecution also exhibited certain documents which have been perused by us during the course of hearing. At the end of the trial and after recording the statement of the accused under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Additional City Sessions Judge convicted/acquitted the accused as mentioned aforesaid. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgement and order passed by the Sessions Court the accused and the State have preferred the present appeals.

(3.) Mr. K.V. Shelat, learned advocate appearing for the accused has stated that considering the fact that considerable period of time has lapsed, this Court may take a considerate view in the matter. He submitted that the accused is remorseful and is ready and willing to pay appropriate amount as compensation to his daughter. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit -in -reply filed by the daughter of the accused No. 1 wherein she has stated that she has been taken care of by her father and that her marriage expenses have been taken care of by her father and maternal uncle.