Decided on April 27,2016

Maganbhai Reshmabhai Damor Appellant


- (1.) The appellant original accused was inter alia sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and was directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code by impugned judgement and order dated 08.04.2011 in Sessions Case No. 218 of 2009 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3 , Panchmahal at Godhra.
(2.) The brief matrix of the prosecution case as disclosed during the trial is that there existed a property dispute between the deceased and the accused. On 08.08.2009, the deceased had gone to the forest as he worked as a watchman in the Bakor Forest range. While the deceased was sleeping on the ground in the forest, he felt someone pour kerosene on him and when he opened his eyes, he saw that the accused was standing there with a tin of kerosene and the accused immediately put a live matchstick on the complainant and set him ablaze. The accused and one Reva Reshma who was also present along with the accused at the scene of offence ran away from there. The complainant started shouting and entered his house and his family members poured water on him and thereafter took him to hospital. 2.1 A complaint in respect of the said incident was registered with Khanpur Police Station being C.R. I-No. 65 of 2009 for offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code. Necessary panchnamas were drawn and investigation was carried out and chargesheet was submitted against the appellant. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court at Nadiad under Section 209 of the Code, where it was registered as Sessions Case No. 218 of 2009. Charge vide Ex. 2 came to be framed against the appellant. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 2.2 The trial was initiated against the appellant and during the course of trial the prosecution examined following witnesses whose evidences have been read before us: JUDGEMENT_342_LAWS(GJH)4_2016.htm
(3.) Heard Mr. Gajendra Baghel, learned advocate appearing for the appellant and Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for respondent State at considerable length. Both the advocates have taken us through the oral as well as documentary evidence recorded during the course of trial.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.