STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MANOHAR @ MANU CHANCHALDAS SINDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal assailing the judgment and order dated 11.04.1994, passed by the City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No.292/1992, whereby all six respondents, original accused, have been acquitted of the Charge under Sections 302, 34, 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("the IPC"), by giving them the benefit of doubt.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is to the effect that Nitaben (the deceased), wife of the complainant Premchand Maganlal, used to stay at the address given in the complaint with her husband and children. The deceased had family relations with respondent accused No.1, Manohar alias Manu Chanchaldas Sindhi, for a long period of time. She frequently visited his house and respondent No.1 used to visit her home. As per the case of the prosecution on 24.04.1992, at about 9:00 PM, respondent No.1 came to the house of the deceased and told her to come to his house that day. The deceased went to the house of respondent No.1, situated at G­Ward, Kubernagar at about 10:00 PM, in an autorickshaw. Respondent No.1, his brothers, namely, Dhanraj alias Dhanu Chanchaldas Sindhi (respondent accused No.2), Meghraj alias Megho Chanchaldas Sindhi (respondent accused No.3), Anita Dharmraj Sindhi (respondent accused No.4 - wife of respondent No.2), Babita alias Mamta Meghraj Sindhi (respondent accused No.5 ­ wife of respondent No.3) and Pushpaben Chanchaldas Sindhi (respondent accused No.6 ­ sister of respondents Nos.1 to 3), were present there. Respondent No.1 and his brothers started demanding money from the deceased, who stated that she had no money. Respondent No.1 then told her to sell her ornaments and give them the money but the deceased refused to sell her ornaments. Therefore, respondents Nos.1 to 3, their sister respondent No.6, along with respondents Nos.4 and 5, colluded together and started giving kick and fist blows to the deceased. Respondents Nos.1 to 3 also started beating the deceased with sticks. The deceased began to shout but the respondents covered her mouth. Respondent No.6 brought a can of kerosene and poured it over the deceased and respondent No.3 lit the match and set the deceased ablaze. When the clothes of the deceased caught fire and the deceased started burning, the respondents receded to a distance. Taking advantage of this, the deceased ran out of the house of the respondents and started shouting for help. People gathered upon hearing her shouts but none tried to save her or extinguish the flames. The deceased saw a heap of sand and extinguished the flames by rolling herself on it. She then took an autorickshaw and went to the Police Station. The arms, legs, face, back and chest of the deceased had got burnt. Police Sub Inspector Mr.N.C.Oza (PW­7) was on duty at the Sardarnagar Police Station during the night between 24.04.1992 and 25.04.1992, when the deceased came to the Police Station at 23:00 Hrs. in a burnt condition. The Police took her in a mobile van to the Civil Hospital for treatment. As her Dying Declaration was to be recorded, the said Police Officer took the opinion of the Doctor and sent a Note (Yaadi) to the Executive Magistrate, who came and recorded the Dying Declaration of the deceased. As the deceased was conscious, PW­7 recorded her complaint. He could not take the signature of the deceased on the said complaint as both her hands were bandaged. A note was made to this effect at the places where her signatures were required. Thereafter, PW­7 sent his report to the Police Station Officer to record the offence. Nitaben died on 30.04.1992 at 21:30 Hrs. PW­7 then visited the Civil Hospital and the Inquest Panchnama was drawn in the presence of two Panch Witnesses. On 25.04.1992, at 00:45 Hrs., the investigation was taken over by Mr.D.V.Pandey (PW­8). The clothes worn by the deceased at the time of the incident were taken into custody and several Muddamal articles were collected from the scene of offence. The statements of witnesses were recorded and experts from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) visited the scene of offence and prepared a Panchnama. A sample of mud, soaked with kerosene, was taken from the back of the house of the respondents. A 'Kapaas' brand match­box, a half burnt match­stick and a half­ burnt slipper were recovered from another street. Respondents Nos.4, 5 and 6 were arrested on 25.04.1992 and respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 were taken into custody on 26.04.1992. All the Muddamal articles were sent to the FSL.

(3.) As the prosecution had gathered sufficient evidence against the respondents, a Chargesheet was filed in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.17, Ahmedabad, for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC. The offences with which the respondents were charged were triable only by a Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court on 10.08.1992. The Charge against the respondents was framed on 17.06.1993. The respondents denied their guilt and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the case was put to trial.