NITESH ATMARAM PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14-8-2001 by the Addl. City Sessions Judge, Court no. 9, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 392 of 2000 recording conviction of the appellants-original accused No. 1 (husband)and accused No. 2 (father-in-law) for the offence under Sec. 302 read with sec. 114 of the Indian Penal Code and imposing sentence for life imprisonment. The learned Addl. City Sessions Judge has however recorded acquittal for the offence under Sec. 498a of I. P. C.

(2.) IT has been submitted by learned Advocate Mr. Buddhbhatti for the appellants-accused that appellant-accused No. 2, father-in-law, has expired, and therefore, this appeal qua accused No. 2 may not survive.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows : 3. 1. It is the case of the prosecution that deceased Ranjanben, complainant wife of accused No. 1, was set ablaze on 6-7-2000 when there was a discussion with regard to the curetting to be done to avoid pregnancy and the child. It is the case of the prosecution that on 6-7-2000 at about 6-30 p. m. when the deceased was present in the house with the husband, A-l and father-in-law, a-2, mother-in-law, original-accused No. 3 and elder brother-in-law Mahendrabhai and the discussion was with regard to curetting operation for avoiding pregnancy and the child, at that time, A-l husband, when she declined to undergo such operation, is said to have started shouting that he does not require her and set her ablaze. Thereupon, A-2 father-in-law, brought a can of kerosene, poured it on the deceased and ignited the match stick, and thereafter, when she started crying for help, all the accused went out and did not try to save her. Thereupon, on hearing her shouts, the neighbours gathered there and put a blanket around her and made her sleep on the cot outside the house. Thereafter, the elder brother of the deceased complainant arrived when he was informed by somebody and also an ambulance was called and she was removed to Shardaben Hospital. Her statement in the form of F. I. R. and dying declaration was recorded in the hospital itself and Head Constable Ratansinh Chauhan had recorded the vardhi and made an entry in the vardhi book on the basis of which the police had recorded the f. I. R. at Exh. 26 at the hospital and the offence was registered being C. R. I. No. 212 of 2000 on the basis of the said vardhi. 3. 2. On the basis of the complaint/f. I. R. , investigation was carried out. After the investigation was over, charge-sheet was submitted and the Judicial magistrate (First Class), after ascertaining as regards the papers given to the accused, committed the case to the City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad as offence under Sec. 302 Of I. P. C. was triable by (he Court of Sessions. 3. 3. After ascertaining as regards the papers made available to the accused, the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge framed charges for the offence under Secs. 302 and 498a of the l. P. C. against the accused persons and proceeded with the trial.