Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Narsibhai Kamjibhai Bamna on 20 December, 2023
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12277/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO.
12277 of 2023
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1673 of 2023
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
NARSIBHAI KAMJIBHAI BAMNA
=============================================
Appearance:
MS KRINA P. CALLA, APP for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 20/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. On 05.12.2023, this Court had passed the following
order : -
"Though served, no one has chosen to appear on behalf
of the respondent.
As a last chance, the matter is kept on 20.12.2023.
2. Despite a last chance given by this Court, the position
remains unaltered. Hence, the matter requires consideration,
issue Rule.
3. The present application has been filed under Section
378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Cr.P.C.'
for short) seeking leave to appeal.
4. The present applicant has preferred the captioned appeal
challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated
14.07.2022 passed by the Sessions Judge, Arvalli at Modasa in
Sessions Case No.23 of 2020, wherein at the end of the trial,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12277/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023
undefined
the Trial Court has acquitted the opponent for the offence
under Section 302, 323, 498(a) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
('the IPC' for short) and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act,
1951.
5. It is the case of the prosecution that on 19.02.2020, when
the complainant - Ramjibhai Jivabhai Dama was present at his
home, his son-in-law - Narsibhai Kamjibhai Bamna informed
the son of the complainant - Shingaji to come Jashwantpura
and further informed that "Lila is sick and unconscious",
therefore, the complainant along with Babubhai, Manjibhai,
Shingabhai and son of the daughter of the complainant -
Jignesh Narsibhai Bamna and other family members of the
complainant had gone at village Jashwantpura, where the dead
body of the deceased daughter of complainant - Lila was kept
on cot in front of house and she was found with multiple
injuries on jaws, beard and neck. Hence, an inquiry was made
from the persons residing nearby and during the inquiry, the
complainant came to know that on 18.02.2020 at about 8:30
hours at night, quarrel has taken place between the husband
and wife near the field of Surjibhai Dharmabhai Bamna and
during this quarrel, Lilaben has fallen down in the field.
Thereafter, the present respondent Narsibhai Kamjibhai Bamna
pulled her at home and before that, his son-in-law caused
death of deceased Lila or by pushing her neck. Thereafter, a
complaint in this regard has been lodged before the Bhiloda
Police Station, which was registered being CR No. I-54 of 2020
for the offence under Sections 302, 323 and 498(a) of the IPC
and Section 135 of the GP Act and the investigation machinery
put into motion.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12277/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023
undefined
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the applicant has
submitted that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate
the evidence of PW-17 Dr.Dineshbhai Sukhdevbhai Chaudhari,
who performed the postmortem of deceased at Exh.43. She
has submitted that according to the evidence of doctor, the
injuries caused to the injured, as mentioned in column No.17,
were antimortem injuries. She has submitted that the
deceased was found with ligature marks on neck in the size of
10x3.5x0.5 cms., as well as fracture on right hand. She has
further submitted that as per the opinion of the medical officer,
the deceased was died due to asphyxia due to strangulation. It
is urged by her that the present application may be allowed.
7. This Court had issued notice to the respondent vide order
dated 05.09.2023 but the respondent has chosen not to
appear before this Court. Even after a last chance given by this
Court vide order dated 05.09.2023, he has chosen not to
appear, hence, the averments made in the present application
remains uncontroverted.
8. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned
APP for the applicant and the avernments made in the
application, the present application deserves to be allowed.
The present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
MAHESH/50
