SURVINBHAI KAVARJIBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant came to be tried in Sessions Case No.135 of 2000 by Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC, for short). The learned trial Judge, at the end of the trial, recorded conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and awarded life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/ -, and in default of payment of fine S.I for one month. The appellant was given benefit of set -off.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the appellant as well as his younger brother Ravyabhai Kavjibhai and deceased Himaben Ravyabhai were residing jointly in a house situated in Village Rajpara, Taluka Valiya. On 06.03.2000, at about 7 p.m., deceased Himaben was preparing meal. The appellant asked Himaben to serve him meal immediately. Deceased Himaben said that she was preparing meal and the meal would be served. Thereupon, the appellant initially inflicted blow with a wooden log used for the purpose of washing clothes on the head of Himaben and, thereafter, inflicted blow with pestle on the head of Himaben. Himaben succumbed to the injuries. At the time of the incident, Rajkumar Ravyabhai, who is son of deceased Himaben was in the kitchen itself and was taking his meal, and had seen the commission of the offence. Dineshbhai Motibhai lodged FIR in connection with this incident. The FIR came to be registered by the police and investigation commenced. Statements of material witnesses were recorded. Weapons used in commission of the offence were seized. After collecting relevant material for the purpose of lodgment of charge -sheet, the charge -sheet came to be filed in the Court of JMFC, Valiya. As the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Bharuch.

(3.) CHARGE was framed against the accused at Exhibit 4 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, to which he did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the completion of the oral evidence, further statement of the appellant came to be recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC and the appellant in his further statement, denied generally all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution and stated that his grandfather had executed a will about a agricultural land and to snatch away said land from him, he was impleaded in this case.