JAYANTIBHAI PANCHIABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 23. 2. 1999 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bharuch for offences punishable under sections 449, 451, 506 (2) and 363 read with section 114 of IPC in Sessions Case No. 95 of 1993 whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and to pay fine of Rs. 300/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment fo 15 days for the offence punishable under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 days for the offence under section 451 of the IPC. The appellant was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 7 days for the offence punishable under section 506 (2) of the IPC. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) IN brief, it is the case of the prosecution that one Shakuntalaben working as security guard in Nari Samrakshan Kendra, Bharuch. It is alleged that as victim Sushilaben Somabhai had love affair with the present appellant-Jayantibhai Panchiabhai and one Chapter Case was lodged against the present appellant-accused before the Executive Magistrate and thereupon the said Sushilaben was removed to the Nari Samrakshan Kendra, Bharuch and thus she was staying there. It is alleged that on 12. 2. 1990, accused No. 1 in company of accused No. 2 and 3 had gone to the compound of the above Narigruh. It is alleged by Shakuntalaben that at about 11 pm, she saw one person coming down with the help of rope and thereafter he was standing near the window. He was having a knife in his hand. It is also the case of the prosecution that Shakuntalaben also found two other persons coming inside the compound with the help of rope. It is alleged that out of those 3 persons, two persons showed knife to one of the girls Aansoya and asked about Sushilaben. Thereupon the other girls of the Narigruh came out from their rooms. The accused also threatened that if they do not open the door and hand over Sushilaben, they will be killed. It is alleged that under the fear, custody of Sushilaben was handed over to the accused-Jayantibhai. It is also alleged that thereupon three persons opened the shutter door of the Narigruh and went away with Sushilaben. Thereupon Shakuntalaben informed the Superintendent of Narigruh, Ms. P G Trivedi and she lodged complaint against the three accused persons which was registered as CR-I 91/90 with Bharuch City Police Station. Statements of Shakuntalaben, Ambaben, Sushila and other inmates who were present at the time of the incident were recorded. During the course of investigation, the accused were arrested. At the end of investigation, charge sheet Exh. 12 was submitted against the three accused persons for the above referred offences before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch.

(3.) AS the offence was sessions triable case, the learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case and thus, the case was committed to the court of Sessions at Bharuch under section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge against all the accused. The charge was read over and explained to the accused. The accused denied all the charges and pleaded to be tried. Hence, the prosecution was asked to prove the guilt against the accused. To prove its case, the prosecution has examined PW 1 Exh. 31, PW 2 Exh. 34, PW 3 Exh. 36, PW 4, Exh. 38 and PW 5 Exh. 40 and has produced and relied upon several documentary evidences including the complaint Exh. 35, Panchnama of scene of offence Exh. 41, Recovery panchnama Exh. 42, Medical report of accused Jayantibhai Exh. 32 and FSL report Exh. 44 etc.