DHARMENDRA ALIAS DHAMO SURESHKUMARPADHIYAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant convict has preferred this appeal under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Surendranagar on 29. 6. 2002 in Sessions Case No. 12 of 2001 convicting him for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, earlier the accused had a love affair with one Rimpal. On 29. 10. 2000 at about 7:30 p. m. , deceased Chintan was going on Luna Moped on a pillion seat with Rimpal. When they reached near Cooperative Jean Gate on the road going to Alankar Talkies, the accused came on cycle from their behind, stopped the Luna and caught hold of Chintan and had a scuffle with him. The accused gave knife blow to Chintan and on account of the injury, Chintan died.

(3.) ON the basis of the first information report lodged by Niranjanbhai Ravishankar Joshi, - father of the deceased, offence was registered and investigation was started. At the end of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against the accused for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. As the offence was triable by Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Sessions Court and it was registered as Sessions Case No. 12 of 2001. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge Exh-10 for the aforesaid offence against the accused. The accused denied having committed the offence and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution adduced evidence. On completion of recording of evidence, the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence against the accused were explained to him. The accused in his further statement recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, denied having committed the offence and also filed written statement stating that after breaking his love affair with Rimpal, there were quarrels between him and the Rimpal; Rimpal had a fear that as she was a daughter of Harijan father and her lover Chintan was a Brahmin, the accused would inform the parents of Chintan and thereby, would create hurdles in their marriage. Therefore, with a view to take revenge, Rimpal and her mother Alkaben have fabricated false complaint and he is innocent.