ADESING BAVABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 34 In our opinion it should be further noted at this stage that it was not for the first time before the Sessions Court that an allegation was made by Bai Sita and others that their statements had not been correctly recorded by the police. On the night of February 13/14 1964 a telegram was sent from Jambusar to the I. G. P. and also to the D.S.P. That telegram was over the signature of Khoda and is Ex. 41 in the present case. The original telegram as received in the office of the I.G.P. at Ahmedabad was produced by Vasant Shantaram Vaidyay P. W. 9 Ex. 40. Vaidya was a clerk working in the office of the I.G.P. and Ex. 41 the telegram which was received in the office of the I.G.P. on February 14 1964 The telegram runs as follows:- My father Zaver Desai murdered at Tankari by (1) Adesang Bava (2) Jitu Patel (3) Uncle of Jitu (4) Jesang Bhukhan (5) Shanker Khusal (6) Shana Khusal (7) Mohmed Ise Umar (Stop) Police not making proper inquiries abusing complainant and witnesses and asked to cancel names of murderers Jitu Patel and Jesang Bhukhan and trying to save them. Therefore request you to appoint special police officer in this inquiry. Khoda Zaver of Tankari.

(2.) In view of the evidence of Jayvadan and in view of the telegram Ex. 41 it is clear that within 12 hours of the recording of their statements viz. of Bai Sita Bai Kushal and Bai Kashi it was complained that the police officer P. S. I. Patel was not writing down correctly all that the witnesses had stated and some twist was being given to the statements which these witnesses were making before the investigating officer.

(3.) In view of the testimony of Vakhatsing and in view of the contents of Ex. 15 it is clear that at the earliest opportunity Bai Sita had come out with the version that accused Nos. 1 to 6 had jointly assaulted her husband and had caused his death. It is true that Ex. 15 came to be written out because of what Khoda Zaver told Head Constable Takhatsing; but in view of the fact that Khoda had come to know of this information from Bai Sita in the presence of Takhatsing himself and also in view of the fact that even before the arrival of Khoda Bai Sita had mentioned the names of these six assailants to Head Constable Takhatsing we hold that the contents of Ex. 15 are nothing else but a statement made by Bai Sita through the mouth of Khoda and Khoda merely acted as a conduit pipe for conveying the message which Bai Sita had to convey to the P. S. I. The formal complainant was Khoda but the real person giving the information was Bai Sita.