MAHESHBHAI VITTHALBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) POLICE Constable Yusuf Saiyedbhai Saiyed was hit by a car at about 03. 30 p. m. on the Railway Over-Bridge of Vapi town on 30th May 2001 while he was a part of a watch organized by police upon a previous tip off about transhipment of liquor in large quantity in a vehicle. He was taken to the doctor immediately after the incident where the accompanying police personnel gave a history of Yusuf having sustained injuries in an accident. Yusuf died within five minutes of being taken to the doctor. Thereafter, the police investigated the matter in direction of likelihood of murder of Yusuf and found that a conspiracy was hatched by five persons to commit murder of Yusuf. As a part of that conspiracy, original accused No. 5 Yogeshbhai Vishnubhai Tandel approached PSI Vaidya at 00. 30 hours on 30th May 2001 at his residence and informed him that a white Uno car would be passing through the over-bridge for smuggling liquor from Vapi to Surat. He also informed P. I. Vaidya that Yusuf may also be kept present while arranging the watch because Yusuf knows the persons concerned. Upon receiving this information, P. I. Vaidya informed the Prohibition Police Station, Pardi and instructed to arrange for a watch at the over-bridge along with panch witnesses. Thereafter, at about 02. 00 hours, police personnel along with panch witnesses reached the railway over-bridge at Vapi. At about 03. 00 hours, the informant Yogeshbhai Vishnubhai Tandel came to the spot in a blue Uno car bearing registration No. GJ-15-K-3305 and informed that within sometime, a white Uno car will pass by the bridge and would be carrying the liquor. After informing this, the said Yogeshbhai Vishnubhai Tandel returned towards Daman. At about 03. 30 hours, a white Uno car came from Daman side. As per previous arrangements made, the person standing at the entry point of the bridge, signaled the team waiting at the exit point of the bridge and they, therefore, tried to intercept the said white Uno car. Amongst the members of the watch party, deceased Yusuf was standing on the right hand side edge of the bridge as one travels from Daman side. The car slowed down for a while, went towards right, hit Yusuf, then it was reversed and then taking a turn, went back towards Daman. It was chased by police jeep. The jeep dashed against the Uno car at the rear portion and four persons emerged therefrom. Two persons were able to escape, whereas two persons were apprehended. The two persons apprehended were Maheshbhai Vitthalbhai and Anandbhai Kishanbhai, and the two who were able to escape were Ramanbhai Shankerbhai Patel and Rajubhai Shivrambhai.

(2.) THE appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 1753 of 2004 are represented by learned advocate Mr. Vijay Patel for H. L. Patel Advocates and the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1939 of 2004 is represented by learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch. The State is represented by learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Maulik Nanavati in both the appeals.

(3.) THE main contention raised on behalf of the appellants is that there is no live link between the offence and the appellants. The evidence is shaky and scanty. The evidence that is led by the prosecution is self-contradictory and based on certain presumptions. The story of conspiracy is an afterthought and therefore, the FIR was lodged late by about three hours. It is also contended that though arrest of the A-3 and A-4 is indicated to be on the spot, in fact, they were arrested at 03. 30 p. m. The investigation is, therefore, not reliable, unbiased and trustworthy.