BHARATBHAI MADHABHAI CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only point urged in the appeal is not disputing the incident but challenging the nature of conviction. The date of incident is 19. 9. 2006 and death has occurred on 16. 10. 2006. The cause of death is septicaemia shock resulting from the injury inflicted by the accused. The deceased was taken out of the hospital against medical advice. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the appellant there was a contributory negligence on the part of the family of the deceased in not getting treatment completely. Learned A. P. P. agrees to all those facts yet he states that it was the husband who had caused the injury and he had the intention of causing death of the deceased.

(2.) WE have given our thoughtful consideration to the facts of the case. The death has occurred nearly 26 days after the incident and direct result of the death is not the injury but septicaemia which developed. Thus, the intention to kill as such as defined under clause thirdly to Section 300 of the IPC is not seen. However, the case may be covered under Part-I of Section 304 of the IPC. The accused is in jail for nearly 12 years. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the accused having remained in jail for a long period of nearly 12 years, the period already undergone would be sufficient to serve the ends of justice.

(3.) IN the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The order of conviction dated 13. 9. 2001 is modified. The conviction of the accused appellant is altered from Section 302 of IPC to Section 304 Part-I of IPC. The substantive sentence already undergone by the accused is considered as sufficient to meet the ends of justice.