LAWS(GJH)-1996-2-34

SWARUPSINH HATHUJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On February 26, 1996
SWARUPSINH HATHUJI Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An offence vide C. R. No. 89 of 1987 was registered against six accused under Secs. 302, 326, 324, 449, 143, 147, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code read with Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act with Rapar Police Station, District Kachchh-Bhuj. After investigation, on charge-sheet being filed, case was registered as Sessions Case No. 2 of 1988 in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kachchh at Bhuj, who, after trial convicted five of the six accused, that is, accused Nos. 1 to 5, for offences under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 149 and under Secs. 326, 324 and 449 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code and passed appropriate sentence whereas accused No. 6 - Padhiyar Vankaji Modji was acquitted. Original accused Nos. 1 to 5, aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence preferred Criminal Appeal No. 695 of 1988 whereas the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 721 of 1988 challenging the order of acquittal passed against accused No. 6, Padhiyar Vankaji Modji. Since both these appeals are arising from the same judgment delivered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kachchh at Bhuj, are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) From the record it also transpires that on the strength of complaint filed by present appellants/accused, a cross-case was also registered against the members of complainant's group. The cross-case against the complainant's group was registered as Sessions Case No. 3 of 1988 against Karman Ambavi Patel and Narsang Ambavi Patel, who were also held guilty for offences charged and were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offences under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of I.P.C. for causing death of Ranubha Hathuji. The appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 697 of 1988 are the original accused is Sessions Case No. 3 of 1988 and aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, have preferred this appeal. Since Sessions Case No. 3 of 1988 is in the nature of cross-complaint and between the same parties/group, the appeal arising therefrom is also disposed of simultaneously by this common judgment.

(3.) It would be appropriate to state here salient features of Sessions Case No. 2 of 1988 giving rise to two appeals, being Criminal Appeal Nos. 695 of 1988 and 721 of 1988.