STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PRAVIN MULJIBHAI HARIJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant State has filed the present appeal under Section 377 of Cr.P.C., seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot (hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court") in Sessions Case No.10/1998 vide judgement and order dated 15th October, 1998, whereby the respondent accused was convicted for the offence under Section 306 and Section 498A of IPC, and was directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 306 of IPC and to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default thereof, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 498A of IPC.

(2.) In the instant case, the present respondent happened to be the husband of the deceased Champaben. The case against the present respondent and against the other three accused, who were the father, the mother and the brother of the present respondent, was registered on the basis of the complaint given by the deceased on 31.10.1997, alleging, inter alia, that she was being subjected to cruelty by the said accused. As regards the incident, she had alleged that at about 6.30 p.m., when she was at home along with her daughters , the respondent i.e. her husband poured kerosene on her and her two daughters and set them ablaze. She had also alleged that her father-in-law, Muljibhai had brought her and her two daughters to the Government Hospital in ambulance, where her two daughters were declared dead. On the basis of the said complaint given by her in the hospital, the same was registered at Malavia Nagar Police Station, Rajkot as I-C.R. No.208/1997 for the offences under Section 302, Section 307, and Section 498A read with Section 114 of IPC. The Investigating Officer, after completion of the investigation had laid the charge-sheet against all the four accused for the said offences in the Court of Executive Magistrate, Rajkot City, who committed the case for trial to the trial Court. The trial Court convicted and sentenced the present respondent as stated herein above and acquitted the other three accused from the alleged offences.

(3.) It is pertinent to note that as per the jail remarks submitted by the learned APP, Ms. Bhatt, the respondent accused has already undergone the sentence imposed by the trial Court and has been released since 16.8.1999. It is also pertinent to note that the present respondent accused had not challenged the order of conviction and sentence by filing any appeal. At the same time, the State has also not filed any appeal against the acquittal of the other accused. The scope of this appeal, therefore, moves in a very narrow compass as to whether the sentence imposed by the trail Court on the respondent accused should be enhanced or not.