LAWS(GJH)-2015-9-20

DADUBHAI ISHWARBHAI VASAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On September 16, 2015
Dadubhai Ishwarbhai Vasava Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal, filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of conviction dated 29.10.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bharuch Camp at Ankleshwar, in Sessions Case No. 50 of 2010. The said case was registered against the appellant-original accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By the impugned judgment and order the appellant is sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/, in default, S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 235(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, on 19.12009 during the evening time the complainant and his mother Kamlaben were in their agricultural field drawing water in the standing crop and in the late night at around 2:00 to 2:30 the complainant woke up and went to his home to see his wife and children since they were alone at home. The complainant reached home at 3:00 O'clock and after about one hour he proceeded to his agricultural field at around 4 O'clock. When he was going towards his field near Mahuvadi tree, situated near the boundary of his agricultural field he saw the accused Dadubhai Vasava who was having dhariya in his hand and going towards his house, at that time, complainant saw him with the light of torch. Thereafter he went to his agricultural field where he found that his mother was lying dead and, therefore, he called his father and brother and they came there. It is alleged in the complaint that Dadubhai Ishwarbhai Vasava has killed his mother as she was harassing the complainant and his mother from very beginning. It is also alleged that there was quarrel going on between them one year prior to the incident. Hence the complaint was lodged.

(3.) Thereafter, charge Ex.4 came to be framed and explained to the accused person, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.