State Of Gujarat vs Naranbhai Madhabhai Valmiki
2021 Latest Caselaw 13856 Guj

     R/CR.MA/5458/2020                                ORDER DATED: 13/09/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5458 of 2020
                                 In
                   R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 467 of 2020

                                        With

                         R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 467 of 2020

==========================================================
                                STATE OF GUJARAT

                                       Versus

                          NARANBHAI MADHABHAI VALMIKI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARDIK SONI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for the Applicant / Appellant - State Authority
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
       and
       HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI

                                  Date : 13/09/2021

                                   ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY)

1. This is an application by the State seeking leave to file appeal to challenge the judgment and order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa, District : Banaskantha in Sessions Case No.4 of 2018.

2. Two accused were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 324, 326, 494(B), 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court has convicted only accused No.1 that too under Section 323 of the IPC and has ordered him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Accused

R/CR.MA/5458/2020 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2021

No.2 is acquitted altogether. This appeal is qua original accused No.1. So far accused No.2 is concerned, there is no appeal.

3. Mr. Hardik Soni, learned APP for the State has submitted that once the factum of the death of the victim because of injuries caused by the accused was accepted by the Sessions Court, there was ample material on record to hold that this was the case of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and in any case the conviction ought to have been recorded under Section 307 of IPC. Attention of this Court is invited to the evidence of the Doctor (Exh.31) to point out that, the injuries sustained by the deceased were such that, the judgment arrived at by the Sessions Court needs to be interfered with. It is submitted that this appeal be entertained.

4. Having heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and having considered the material on record, this Court finds that, the glaring aspect of the matter is that, the incident had taken place on 19.09.2017 and the victim had died on 04.12.2017. One old wooden stick was used to inflict injury and it was also in heated moments. These are the circumstances which are noted by the Sessions Court and considering the fact that the date of incident was 19.09.2017 and the victim died on 04.12.2017, according to us, the Sessions Court has rightly arrived at the conclusion that the charge against the accused could not be said to have been brought home under Section 302 of the IPC. Thus, on principle point, no interference may be required from this Court.

5. The alternative argument that if not Section 302, then

R/CR.MA/5458/2020 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2021

the conviction ought to have been recorded either under Section 307 or 325 etc., would not be required to be gone into by this Court in the glaring aspects as noted above. No useful purpose would be served by entertaining the appeal sought to be presented before this Court.

6. For the above reasons, leave as prayed for is refused. This application is disposed of.

7. In view of above, the appeal would not survive. Appeal also stands disposed of accordingly.

(PARESH UPADHYAY, J)

(A. C. JOSHI,J) M.H. DAVE/187