SHANTILAL BACHUBHAI BARIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated 31. 3. 2001 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 242 of 2001, convicting the appellants for the offence under Sections 302 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE prosecution story started with lodging of the First Information Report filed on the basis of the statement given by the Sarpanch. The sarpanch has been examined thrice before the police and, at every stage, he has been improving the case. Therefore, the learned advocate for the appellants submits that this witness cannot be relied.

(3.) ANOTHER aspect of the death of the deceased is due to drowning and no violence is found on the person of the deceased. In absence of marks of violence on the person of the deceased, it cannot be said that the deceased was subjected to any unnatural, mechanical death. It was a natural accident due to drowning. That being the position, it cannot be said that the appellants-accused are guilty of causing death of the deceased.