BAHADURSINH JILUBHA SODHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a judgment and order rendered by Sessions Court, Kutch, at Gandhidham, in Sessions Case No. 20 of 2003. Two persons Ratansinh alias Ratanbha Govubha and Bahadursinh Jilubha Sodha were tried by the Sessions Court for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 3 (2) (5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The Trial Court, at the end of the trial, convicted accused No. 2, Bahadursinh Jilubha Sodha, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, and, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days. The Trial Court also convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for seven days. The Trial Court, however, acquitted original accused No. 1, Ratansinh alias Ratanbha Govubha of the charges levelled against him.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the conviction, accused No. 2, Bhadursinh Jilubha Sodha, has preferred Criminal appeal No. 1155 of 2004, whereas the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1657 of 2004 against the acquittal of original accused No. 1, Ratansinh alias Ratanbha Govubha. Since both these appeals arise out of the same judgment and order, they are heard together and are decided by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1155 of 2004 is referred to as "accused No. 2" and the respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 1657 of 2004 is referred to as "accused No. 1" in this judgment.

(3.) AS per the prosecution case, the accused persons suspected Haribhai Ranabhai Koli of having committed theft of a tin containing wash for manufacuring liquor and nurtured a grievance against him. On the day of incident, i. e. on 28th February, 2003, they went to P. W. 4, Baluben, who was working in the field, and inquired, if Haribhai was there. While denying, Baluben inquired as to why were they looking for him and they disclosed that he had committed theft and, therefore, if they come across him, they would cut him to pieces. Then they went away. A few minutes thereafter, Baluben started for fetching water. After going to some distance, she noticed the two accused persons going through Momaiyawala field. She also noticed Haribhai Ranabhai approaching from the opposite direction. She, therefore, felt that the two accused persons would kill him and she, therefore, ran towards them shouting at the accused persons not to commit assault. But before Baluben could reach the place, they had assaulted Haribhai and left the place. On reaching the place, she noticed Haribhai lying on the ground in an injured condition dead. She, therefore, immediately rushed to the house of Haribhai Ranabhai, where she found his wife Baluben and his father Ranabhai. She informed them that Haribhai was assaulted upon by the accused persons; and that accused No. 1 and accused No. 2 had a stick and a Dharia, respectively, with them, with which they assaulted. On learning about the same, Ranabhai went to the spot and found that his son was lying there dead. He then went to the town and informed the Police on telephone. On the basis of that telephonic information, an entry was made with Rapar Police Station to the effect that on telephone, Ranabhai Koli had informed that a dead body was lying in the field in the outskirts of Suvai Village. The police was set into motion and, ultimately, recorded F. I. R. of Niliben Haribhai. Offence was registered and investigated. Charge sheet was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rapar, which, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions and Sessions Case No. 20 of 2003 came to be registered.