AMRATBHAI VIRCHANDBHAI DANTANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these 4 appeals arise out of the judgment and order rendered by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, F. T. C. No. 2, Gandhinagar at Kalol on 3/8/2006 in Sessions case No. 67/2005, whereby all the 4 appellants, who were original accused nos. 1 to 4 in the aforesaid Sessions Case, came to be convicted for the offences punishable under sections 392 read with sections 114 and 34, 394 read with sections 114 and 34 of the IPC and 504 of the IPC and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment [ri] for 10 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment [si] for one year for the offences punishable under section 392 read with sections 114 and 34 of the IPC, RI for 7 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for 6 months for the offences punishable under section 394 read with sections 114 and 34 of the IPC and SI for 3 months for the offence punishable under section 504 of the IPC. In the impugned judgment, the Ld. Trial Judge recorded their acquittal for the offences punishable under section 427 read with sections 114 and 34 of the IPC and in the impugned judgment, the trial Court recorded acquittal of original accused no. 5 Amratji alias Bhagaji Mafaji Thakor from all the offences charged against him.

(2.) THE prosecution case as unfolded during the course of trial, is that the incident occurred at about 18. 45 hours on 11/11/2004 on a road coming from Bhimasan and going to Thol near one Radar station situated in Kalol Taluka, District Gandhinagar. At the relevant time and place, first informant Rameshbhai Bhavanbhai along with his wife Sumitraben and 2 children were proceeding on motor bike bearing registration No. GJ-1-BF-2097 and 4 miscreants intercepted his motor bike and he was assaulted by them with wooden log and he sustained injury. As the miscreants inflicted blow with wooden log on the head of Rameshbhai while he was driving the motor bike and while the motor bike was in motion, he lost control over the bike and Rameshbhai as well as pillion riders fell on a road side bush. It is the case of the prosecution that one of the miscreants snatched away earrings of Sumitraben and according to the prosecution case, the miscreants robbed two golden chains, one golden ring and cash of Rs. 18,500/- along with clothes. As per the prosecution case, first informant Rameshbhai along with his wife and children initially went to Primary Health Centre, Meda Adaraj village and then Government Hospital, Kadi and ultimately to Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad, in a rickshaw of PW 12 Raghuji Gabhaji. The incident was reported by Rameshbhai Bhavanbhai to Kalol Taluka Police Station and his FIR was registered. Police investigation was commenced. During the course of investigation, on the basis of the description given by the first informant in his FIR and recording the statements of witnesses, all the 4 appellants accused along with accused no. 5 Amratji were arrested. Test Identification Parade [tip for short] was arranged and during the course of TIP, both, first informant Rameshbhai and his wife Sumitraben identified all the 4 appellants. At the instance of accused no. 1 Bhimabhai Balubhai, 4 small ingots came to be seized from the shop of PW 14 Narendrabhai Patel. After collecting the required material for the purpose of lodgement of charge-sheet, charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalol. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Ld. Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Gandhinagar at Kalol, which was numbered as Sessions Case No. 67 of 2005.

(3.) LD. Trial Judge framed charge at exh. 7, to which the appellants did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the prosecution concluded its oral evidence, Ld. Trial Judge recorded further statements of the appellants under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code [cr. P. C. ]. They generally denied all the incriminating evidence put to them by the trial Court and stated that they were falsely implicated in this case. After considering the evidence on record and the submissions made on behalf of both the sides, the Ld. Trial Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt so far as offences punishable under sections 392, 394, 504 read with sections 114 and 34 of the IPC are concerned and recorded conviction of all the 4 appellants, and awarded the sentence as hereinabove referred to in this judgment, which has given rise to all these 4 appeals.