STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMANLAL CHIMANLAL KHATRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent was charge-sheeted to the Court for committing murder of one Ambalal Jagjivandas Purani of Broach by giving him stab wounds with a knife at about 8.15 p.m. on 6-3-1966 at Vankarvas Tekra In Kabirpura locality in the City of Broach He was also charged for the offence under sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act 1951 for contravention of an order passed by the District Magistrate Broach under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 37 of the Bombay Police Act 1951 The Committing Magistrate after making a preliminary inquiry committed him to the Court of Sessions at Broach to stand his trial for the aforesaid two offences. The deceased Ambalal was working as a clerk in the District Court at Broach. the case had thereupon come to be transferred to the Court of Sessions at Baroda by this Court The learned Sessions Judge Baroda Mr. S. M. Nanavati convicted the respondent of an offence punishable under sec. 304 Part 2 of the Indian Penal Code and for the offence under sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act 1951 He has been sentenced to suffer four years rigorous imprisonment on the first count and to suffer four months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 50.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer 15 days further rigorous imprisonment on the second count. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment are ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The State has filed the present appeal feeling that the respondent ought to have been convicted of an offence punishable under sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The State has also filed the aforesaid Criminal Revision Application No. 32 of 1967 feeling that the sentence awarded to the respondent for the offence punishable under sec. 304 Part 2 of the Indian Penal Code is grossly inadequate. ... ... ... ... ... ...

(3.) The learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Bakshi also lays stress on his argument that the offence committed could be said to be an offence punishable under sec. 304 Part 1 of the Indian Penal Code. In support of his argument he relied upon the following factors:-