RAHUL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction dtd. 19/6/2013 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Sessions Case No.47 of 2011 for the offence under Sec. 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the appellant - accused has preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( "the Code " for short), whereby the appellant - accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is ordered to undergo life imprisonment and fine of ? 5,000/-, and in default of fine, is ordered to undergo further six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that, on 7/12/2010 at about 22:30 hours, when the complainant was watering the wheat crop in the field of Jayantibhai Bhathibhai Zala, at that time, one Suresh, who happens to be the nephew of Vebaben Fatesinh Zala, came and told that there was a phone call from home and therefore, the complainant returned towards his house from there. On the way, the people, who gathered at Hanuman Temple, informed that one dead body of male is lying near the field of Budhaji Fateji, which is situated towards Ghodali Road. Therefore, the complainant, along with the village persons viz., Motibhai Desaibhai Chauhan, Bhaijibhai Bababhai Chauhan, Ravjibhai Chandubhai Chauhan and Rajubhai Laxmanbhai Zala, went to the police station for informing the police. Thus, the complainant - Prabhatbhai Khodabhai Zala lodged the complaint with regard to the incident before the Mahemdabad Police Station, which was registered as C.R.- I No.252 of 2010 for the offences under Sec. 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(3.) In pursuance of the complaint lodged by the complainant, investigating agency recorded statements of the witnesses, collected relevant evidence in form of medical evidence and drawn various Panchnamas and other relevant evidence for the purpose of proving the offence. After having found material against the appellant accused, charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahemdabad. As said Court lacks jurisdiction to try the offence, it committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad as provided under sec. 209 of the Code.