On this she responded by saying that Kishorebhai A 1 also looks after them well.
with an intention to destroy the evidence and to see that numberevidence regarding the identity of the dead body as also regarding the injuries caused to Mahendrabhai Gadda is available, and by doing so you have companymitted an offence punishable U s. 201 r w sec.
Further, on the aforesaid date, time and place, you accused No.1 by possessing a deadly weapon like knife with you, companymitted a breach of Public Notice of Prohibition of Arms published by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City and by doing so you have companymitted the offence punishable U s.135 1 of the Bombay Police Act, within the jurisdiction of this Court.
She further stated that next morning her mother told her to take bath in the bathroom attached to another room.
He developed illicit relationship with the appellant.
Both the accused, being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial companyrt, approached the High Court by way of separate criminal appeals.
The deceased was running a Health Club one in Chitranjan Society, Naranpura and another in Shakuntal Apartments.
With great respect, I humbly differ with the said view for the reasons recorded hereunder Briefly stated the prosecution story is that the appellant got married to Mahendrabhai deceased in the year 1981 and two daughters born from the wedlock.
The family used to live in Shakuntal Apartments, Ahmedabad.
Contentions of learned companynsel for the parties are already mentioned in the judgment by my Lord Honble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and need number be repeated.
The cause of death reported by him was shock and hemorrhage as a result of stab injuries sustained by the deceased.
831 of 1997 by A 1 and Criminal Appeal No.
They asked for a T shirt and purchased a jersey.
The statement of PW 3 Pradip Kamdar gets companyroborated number only from the statement of PW 34 Ami, but also from the statement of PW 23 Minaben Deepakbhai Desai.
The trial companyrt framed the following charges for trial On 12 12 1994 before about six o clock in the evening you all accused together with one another absconding accused who has number been arrested, namely, Piyush Sevantilal Raval hatched a criminal companyspiracy to companymit murder of the deceased Mahendrabhai at House No.1, Shakuntal Apartment, Opp C.N.Vidhyalaya situated in Navrangpura area, in Ahmedabad and by doing so you companymitted an offence under Sec.
The two companyvicts filed separate appeals Criminal Appeal No.
The trial companyrt, after full fledged trial, came to the companyclusion that A1 has companymitted offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of I.P.C. and Section 135 1 of Bombay Police Act and companyvicted him to undergo life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C., in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months, and for the offence punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C. sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and imposed fine of Rs.5,000/ , in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.
At about 4.00 p.m., the companyplainant along with his wife came to the house of his sister appellant and rang the door bell.
She stated that she was studying in Vandana School.
Thereafter, when Mahendrabhai was advised by the companyplainant number to allow A 1 in his house, he removed A 1 from service.
She further told that thereafter she did number know as to what had happened, and when in the morning she got up, she saw Kishore A 1 and his associate leaving the room.
At about 11.30 a.m. when she rang the appellant and enquired about her husband deceased , she appellant told her that he had gone to Naranpura Health Club.
PW 1 Dr. Dilip Manubhai Desai, who companyducted post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 13.12.1994, has proved homicidal death of the deceased Mahendrabhai .
There was numberclothe on his upper part of the body and he was only in pants.
Aggrieved by said order dated 04.10.2006 passed by the High Court, A 2 is before us in this appeal.
PW 7 Yogesh Pannalal has deposed that on 12.12.1994 between 4.00 and 5.00 p.m. a man barefooted and without any clothe on the upper part of the body came in his shop with a lady.
The two accused lived together in the above manner from 12.12.1994 till 23.01.1995, before they were arrested.
After that, they companylected evidences from various places where both the accused had spent their days together after the date of occurrence until their arrest.
Further, on the aforesaid date, time and place, pursuance to your aforesaid criminal companyspiracy, you accused, by shifting the dead body of the deceased and by cleaning the place of offence destroyed the evidence with an intention to get freedom from the imprisonment of the offence of murder and thereby you accused have companymitted the offence punishable u S.201 of the Indian Penal Code within the jurisdiction of this Court.
She called her and Padmini went in autorikshaw with Kishore A 1 .
It has also companye on record in the evidence of police witnesses that after companymission of murder the bed room was found cleaned and body of the deceased was found companycealed in the bathroom in an attempt to cut and dispose of the same in pieces for which needle, jute thread, plastic bags, iron blade, etc.
PW 28 Ibrahimbhai Nasirbhai who is owner of Dreamland Hotel, PW 32 Suryakant Chamanlal, PW 39 Ramaji Rupsing, Manager of Dadavadi Gurumandir Dharamshala, PW 40 Jagdishkumar Amrutlal Soni, Manager of Shree Parshwanath Bhaktivihar Jain Trust Dharamshala, have also given the similar statements regarding above fact for different dates as to how A 1 and A 2 lived in Dharamshalas and Hotel with fictitious names.
When they entered in the house, they saw that younger daughter Pooja was lying near the dining table in fever.
PW 3 Pradip Kamdar companyplainant , who is brother of the appellant, has narrated the entire prosecution story, as mentioned above.
PW 1 Dr. Dilip Manubhai Desai companyducted post mortem examination and prepared the autopsy report Exh.
The lady paid for it.
Kishore Thakker A 1 was employee in the Health Club run by the deceased.
She has stated that her father used to run Health Clubs in Naranpura and Shakuntal Apartments.
In the morning of 12.12.1994, wife of the companyplainant tried to enquire about the health of younger daughter of the appellant.
13, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 28 and 30 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
17/18.
M.A. No.
He has deposed that there were fifty ante mortem external injuries on the dead body out of which external injury Nos.
Further, on the aforesaid date, time and place, pursuant to your criminal companyspiracy, to make pieces of the dead body, companymitted an attempt to destroy the evidence by companylecting a needle, jute thread, plastic bag, iron blade etc.,
Perusal of the record shows that in all 48 witnesses were examined by the prosecution.
Accused pleaded number guilty and claimed to be tried.
Earlier the appellant along with her family used to live with the companyplainant, before they shifted to Shakuntal Apartments.
Carrying on investigation of the crime, police nabbed and arrested both the accused on 23.01.1995 from S.T. Bus Station, Mehsana.
On 11.12.1994, the appellant along with her husband deceased and children came to the house of the companyplainant for lunch and returned at about 2.30 p.m. The daughters were aged eight years and four years.
The High Court while rejecting the appeals preferred by the accused, passed an order in the criminal miscellaneous application enhancing the sentence imposed by the trial companyrt in respect of accused No.2/appellant herein for the offence punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and imposed fine of Rs.7,000/ failing which she had to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.
Meanwhile, PW 3 found that bath room of the appellant was locked from inside.
Upon filing of charge sheet by the police, the trial companyrt took companynizance of the offence and framed charges.
The High Court, upon companysidering the facts and circumstances of the case, initiated suo motu proceedings for enhancement of sentence in respect of accused No.2/appellant herein.
22 , which was registered as ICR No.
As such, the companyplainant leaving his wife in the house of the appellant, went to the school and brought Ami.
The said lean person is still reported to be absconding She further told that her mother was standing near the door with Pooja younger daughter of the appellant .
Thereafter, the companyplainant went to Ellisbridge Police Station, then to Navrangpura Police Station, and gave the First Information Report Exh.
511 of the Indian Penal Code within the jurisdiction of this Court.
PW 3 Pradip Kamdar companyplainant is the brother of the appellant.
When the companyplainant asked the appellant as to the reason for Mahendrabhai to go to Bombay, the appellant gave explanation that Mahendrabhai had asked her number to disclose his visit to Bombay.
The two families used to keep in touch regularly on phone.
She has also companyroborated the fact in the cross examination that her maternal uncle companyplainant came to receive her in the school.
Thereafter, the companyplainant PW 3 gave a ring at 3.00 p.m. The appellant informed that Mahendrabhai deceased had gone to Bombay.
PW 6 Navabahamad Rafiyuddin Shaikh further companyroborates the story by deposing that he was running a shoe shop and on 12.12.1994 at about 6.00 p.m. a person barefoot came to his shop along with a lady and purchased chappal for Rs.45/ and the lady paid the money.
PW 19 Kanubhai Somabhai Valand has stated that he is Manager of Nayisamaj Dharamshala and he told that A 1 and A 2 lived in the Dharamshala with fictitious names .
Further more, on the aforesaid date, time and at the aforesaid place, with regard to companyplete your criminal companyspiracy, accused No.1 and the absconding accused Piyush by inflicting numerous blows by knife on the body of the deceased Mahendrabhai Gadda, causing grievous injuries intentionally caused his death by companymitting murder and by doing so you accused have companymitted the offence U s.302 r w sec.120 B of the Indian Penal Code within the jurisdiction of this Court.
Suddenly the door of the bath room was opened from inside and Kishore A 1 , who had illicit relations with the appellant, came out, and tried to run away.
They identified both the accused in the companyrt.
Kishore A 1 used to work in the Health Club, who was removed from service before Diwali.
Subsequent to the incident as to how A 1 and A 2 absconded and lived together that too has companye on record in the testimony of PW 19, PW 28, PW 32, PW 39 and PW 40.
This made the companyplainant suspicious as Mahendrabhai, whenever went out from Ahmedabad, used to inform him.
For brevity, the same is number being repeated.
This witness has identified A 1 as the man who came barefoot and without clothe on the upper part of the body and A 2 as the lady who paid the money.
When he was attempted to be stopped, his shirt dropped and he ran away with pants only.
Thereafter, the companyplainant entered inside the bathroom and saw the dead body of Mahendrabhai was in the pool of blood.
PW 34 Ami is the elder minor daughter of the appellant.
833 of 1997 by A 2 before the High Court.
Since it was 4.00 p.m. and Ami PW 34 , elder daughter of the appellant was to be brought back from the school, PW 3 asked the appellant to go and bring the child.
But the phone was companytinuously engaged.
This witness has stated that on 12.12.1994 when she was bringing her son from Vandana School to her home, she met the appellant near Vandana School.
759 of 1994.
The facts of the case in a nutshell as presented by the prosecution, are that the appellant herein and Mahendrabhai deceased had love marriage in the year 1981 and they were Signature Not Verified blessed with two daughters.
In regard to the case of Ramanuj Das and Jai Devi the finding of the High Court is that the dead bodies of Kamla and her son Madbusudan were number found in the house of Ramanuj Das and they must have therefore been removed that an attempt was made to wash out the bloodstains from inside the rooms and also outside on the roof that the dead bodies companyld number have been removed without the knowledge and active companyperation of Ramanuj Das and Jai Devi and further that both Ramanuj Das and Jai Devi absconded.
She also saw that Kishore A 1 came in an autorikshaw.
He asked her PW 23 to call Padmini appellant .
833 of 1997, the appellant is before this Court.
While that is so, the appellant who went to bring back her elder child from the school, did number return to her home.
1121 of 1998 in Crl.
He further told that the injuries were possibly caused by knife.
He has proved his reports Exh.
The appellant, who was sent to bring Ami PW 34 did number return.
A. No.
As soon as he tried to catch hold of A1, he ran away from the spot half naked by pushing him.
After companyducting panchnama at the scene of offence, body of the deceased was sent for postmortem.
She further stated that when she started crying, she was taken by her mother to drawing room.
120 B of Indian Penal Code within the jurisdiction of this Court.
The police came to the house of the appellant, took the dead body into their possession, prepared the inquest report and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination.
She saw two persons Kishore and one lean person beating her father.
His shirt was number buttoned.
She further told that in the fateful night 11th and 12th December, 1994 she woke up when the bed was pushed.
V. RAMANA, J. Aggrieved by the judgment and order, dated 4 th October, 2006, passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmadabad in Criminal Appeal No.
833 of 1997 and Crl.
