DIPSINH RAMSINH VAGHELA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30. 7. 1998 passed below Exh. 28 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nadiad in Sessions Case No. 59 of 1998 whereby the appellant was sentenced to to suffer one month's simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.

(2.) THE case in brief is that deceased Amrutiben was wife of accused. On 9. 10. 1997, when the deceased came back from her parents place, the accused insisted her to go back and on this there was a quarrel between the deceased and the accused. It is alleged that the accused tried to physically assault her and she ran for her rescue and the accused chased her and she was stopped by his uncle and she fell down in the field and the accused caught hold of her, sat on her and strangulated her with coir. She died there itself. It is the case of the prosecution that after the marriage, accused husband always was suspecting the deceased and he alleged that she had illicit relationship with someone in her parents' place and in this regard frequently there were quarrels between the two. On getting information, P. I of Kapadwanj police station, Shri Balwantsinh Rana reached to the place of the offence. The accused was present. Statement of the accused was recorded, inquest panchnama was drawn and the muddamal coir was taken into custody. The body was taken to Primary Health Centre for post mortem. Next day, offence for offence under section 302 and 498a was registered. After investigation, accused was arrested. Charge sheet was submitted in the court of learned JMFC, As the offence was sessions triable case, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge Nadiad. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge against 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.

(3.) THE prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and has produced and relied upon several documentary evidence including the inquest panchnama, panchnama of recovery of muddamal weapon, panchnama of scene of offence, post mortem note etc.