RAMESHBHAI CHUNABHAI BUBADIYA Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the original accused -appellant, herein, challenging the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar (for short, 'the trial Court'), Dated: 25.11.2004, whereby, the trial Court convicted the appellant -accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 100/ - and in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for 7 (seven) days.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case of the prosecution as set out before the trial Court are that the appellant, herein, lodged a complaint before the Poshina Police Station on 13.03.2003, wherein, he stated that he is a resident of Village: Jiznat Nadiya Fali, Tal.: Khedbrahma and that he do casual labour work. It is, further, stated in the complaint that the appellant was married to one Kamli, i.e. the deceased, before about two years of the alleged incident. After getting married with the deceased, the appellant and the deceased went in search of labour work towards Sirohi, from where the deceased fled with one Chandubhai Thavrabhai Bubadiya, and therefore, the appellant came back to his village. It is also stated, therein, that after three months from her elopement with aforesaid Chandubhai, the deceased Kamli returned to the house of the appellant. It is stated therein that after Dipavali, the deceased stayed with the accused for sometime, and then, again suddenly she went away without informing her. It is stated in the complaint that, since, the petitioner did not want to have the deceased Kamli back as his wife, he went to Palanpur in search of labour work and during this time, though, he made inquires, the deceased did not return. It is, then, stated in the complaint that as the festival of Holi was approaching, on 12.03.2003, the appellant left his home early in the morning and reached Palanpur at about 11:00 a.m., where, he met his wife, i.e. the deceased Kamli. When the accused inquired from her, as to why have you come here, the deceased told him that she has come to stay with him. Thereafter, both of them went to Ambaji from Palanpur and from there to Hadad and then to Poshina. When the appellant inquired from the deceased as to where she was during this period, she replied that she was at her parental home. The appellant and the deceased reached Poshina at about 05:00 p.m. and they stayed there for a while. Then, as the darkness started falling, the appellant and the deceased Kamli started walking towards their home, however, on the way the appellant told the deceased that let us go to village Kathiya, i.e. at the place of his uncle's, as I want to make some inquires from you, as he had decided to do away with her due to her extra -marital affairs. The appellant and the deceased reached Kathyia at about 11:00 p.m.. The appellant is having land in Kathiya and one Chunabhai Dutabhai of village Chandrana has built -up a house on his land, which was open. Hence, the deceased and the appellant went into that house. In the house, when the appellant ignited a matchstick, he found a stick lying on the floor. Then, the accused picked -up the stick and delivered a blow on the head of the deceased and due to that the deceased fell down. The appellant remained there for some time and informed his relatives about the same, and then, they went to lodge a complaint. On registration of the offence, police carried out investigation and on finding sufficient evidence filed a charge -sheet against the appellant before the learned JMFC, Khedbrahma. However, as the offence was exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Sessions Court at Himmatnagar.

(3.) OVER and above the same, the prosecution also adduced the following documentary evidences in support of its case.