JAGDISHBHAI KANTIBHAI VASAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who was original accused in Sessions Case No. 104/2002, has preferred this appeal challenging the legality and validity of his conviction recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-3, Baroda, on 12. 9. 2003, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ["ipc" for short] and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to undergo S. I for 30 days. The accused was ordered to be given the benefit of set off.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in nutshell, is that the incident occurred on 15. 4. 2002 at about 13. 30 hours, in the house of deceased Jyotsnaben, situated in Tarsali area of Baroda City. The accused, who happens to be the step-son of deceased Jyotsnaben, on the day of the incident at about 13. 30 hours, commented his step-mother deceased Jyotsnaben that she had not prepared the meal properly and he demanded Rs. 10/- from her, which she refused and, therefore, the accused poured kerosene on the person of the deceased and set her on fire. The deceased shouted for help and therefore, neighbours came to her rescue and took her to Government Hospital. The deceased, while under treatment, lodged FIR, which came to be registered, initially, for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. During the course of treatment, the deceased expired and, therefore, offence punishable under Section 302 IPC came to be added in the FIR. During the course of investigation, police recorded statements of material witnesses. Executive Magistrate Mr. Bhaliya recorded dying declaration of the deceased. After collecting the required material for the purpose of lodgment of charge sheet, charge sheet came to be filed in the Court of learned J. M. F. C. Baroda against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Baroda, where it was registered as Sessions Case No. 104/2002.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge framed charge at Exh. 4 against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, to which the accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the prosecution completed its oral evidence, the learned trial Judge recorded further statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P. C, and the accused denied generally all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution and submitted that he was falsely implicated in this case. After considering the evidence on record and the submissions made on behalf of both the sides, the learned trial Judge observed that the dying declaration (Exh. 18) recorded by Executive Magistrate Mr. Bhaliya (PW. 7) was reliable and trustworthy. It was further observed that the dying declaration was supported by the evidence of eye witness Meenaben Vasava examined at Exh. 20. The learned trial Judge relying upon the dying declaration and the evidence of eye witness Meenaben Vasava recorded conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and awarded sentence, as stated hereinabove.