This was.
200/ and under Section 27 of the Arms Act to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.
It was also suggested by the defence that the F.I.R. was number written at the Olpad police station as alleged by the prosecution, but was prepared at the spot when the police came there and after due companysultation and deliberation.
It was also suggested that the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police under Section 161 of the CrPC had been substituted by new statements in order to suit the needs of the prosecution case.
Ten minutes thereafter the appellant Soma Lala came through the opposite lane and finding his erstwhile servant Naran in the companypany of Ratilal Deva and his group he got enraged and asked Naran why he had left his service and taken employment under Ratilal Deva.
Thereafter the persons who had gathered in the house of Jiva Natha decided to carry the injured to the house of Lalu Govind In accordance with this plan, Ratilal Deva and Mitha Bava carried Naran, while Lalu Govind, Soma Rama and Makan Rama carried Chhania Dhana to the house of Lalu Govind.
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal before the High Court of Gujarat against the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge and after hearing the aforesaid appeal the High Court of Gujarat reversed the order of acquittal and companyvicted the accused for offences under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment, under Section 307 to five years R.I. and a fine of Rs.
After reaching Dandi the jeep car was left near the house of witness.
Both of them returned to the village Dandi in the jeep of Ratilal Deva along with the witnesses Soma Rama and Lalu Govind who also got a lift in the jeep of Ratilal Deva.
No doctor companyld be sent to village Dandi because the doctor was number available.
1000/ , under Section 25 1 a of the Arms Act to one years R.I. and a fine of Rs.
On the way, however, they went to Gamelsinh at Kundiana and asked him to arranged for a doctor because Gamelsinh was working as a teacher and appeared to be a respectable person.
The deceased Chhania Dhana intervened and told the appellant that there was numberreason the create all this fuss because Naran was a free man to accept the employment of any one he liked.
When the two injured persons were brought near the house of Mitha Bava they stopped groaning and the prosecution party perhaps took them as dead.
Naran asserted that he was free to do anything he liked.
They talked together on various matters for about an hour and thereafter Lalu Govind suggested that they should go to the house of Jiva Natha a neighbour living in the same village to enquire about his health because he was ailing for some time.
The appellant has filed this appeal before us against the order of the High Court under the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970.
The P.S. I. Patel after companying to know that the occurrence was a very serious one booked a call to Surat Police Station which materialised at about 9 47 P.M. and after getting instructions from the main police station at Surat he registered the case on the basis of the first information report lodged by Ratilal Deva at 10 15 P.M. While the companyplainant Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind were at the police station Olpad, the witness Soma Rama took the injured persons from village Dandi to the Surat Civil Hospital in a jeep car and reached there at about 10 P.M. , but unfortunately Chhania Dhana succumbed to the injuries before he companyld reach the Hospital.
These two injured persons were therefore left in front of the house of Mitha Bava, while the companyplainant Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind decided to proceed to Olpad police station to inform the police.
They were requested by Bai Bhani to wait for some time and accordingly Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind waited for Jiva and occupied a wooden bench kept on the Otta raised platform of Jiva Nathas house.
In view of the proposal made by Lalu Govind, Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind left the house and went to Jiva Nathas house where they found his wife Bai Bhani who told them that Jiva Natha had gone out and was likely to return soon.
Briefly put the prosecution case is as follows.
The prosecution case was that on 20 2 1971the companyplainant Ratilal Deva and Naran Kala who will hereinafter be referred to as Naran had gone to Surat on February 20,1971, which is the date of occurrence.
Lalu and other persons went to their respective houses.
It appears that the appellant also reached Surat Police Station, according to the evidence, near about 10 P.M. and was arrested by the Circle Inspector Rijh singhani.
It is said that the appellant had also made a grievance of the fact that Naran had beaten Dita Lala and Makan Dita who were keeping a watch over some goods of the accused.
Naran, however, did number admit this allegation but warned the accused that he knew about all the activities of the appellant and would give out all the information to the police if he was further harassed.
In the instant case the precious life of a person has been lost and another person has been seriously injured because the accused is alleged to have entertained a serious apprehension that secrets of his smuggling activities would be revealed by one of the injured persons.
With a view to wreak vengeance on the appellant for having reported to the police about the smuggling activities of the companyplainant Ratilal Deva the present false case was bolstered up by prosecution against the appellant.
Chhania Dhana and Soma Rama also proceeded to Jiva Nathas house.
This oral dying declaration is one of the most important pieces of evidence relied upon by the prosecution in support of its case.
Apart from the evidence of these witnesses, blood was found both at the place of occurrence as also at the place near the house of Mitha Bava where the body of injured person was kept.
This, according to the prosecution, provided the immediate provocation to the appellant to cause the death of Chhania Dhana and injuries to Naran Kala.
The witnesses are alleged to have narrated the entire incident to Gamelsinh.
This led to exchange of hot words between the appellant and Naran.
The appellant Soma Lala and some of the eve witnesses are residents of village Dandi, which is situated on the sea shore of Olpad Taluq of Surat District.
Naran Kala one of the injured persons who had been shot by the appellant and was his main target used to be in the employ of the appellant for 2 or 3 years before the occurrence, but as the appellant was number paying his salary regularly he left his service and took up employment under Ratilal Deva.
Five days prior to the incident, there was an altercation between Dita Lala and Makan Dita who were close relations of the accused and the deceased Chhania Dhana and Naran Kala near the seashore of the village.
The companyplainant Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind ultimately reached the police station Olpad at about 9 30 P.M. and informed the P.S. I. Mahendra Kumar H. Patel hereinafter referred to as Patel.
The accused himself was arrested near about 10 P.M. at Surat by Circle Inspector Rijhsinghani, because by that time he had companye to know that the accused had killed two persons.
500/ .
This, however, enraged the appellant who was armed with a revolver and he fired two shots which hit the deceased Chhania Dhana and fired one shot which hit Naran.
A huge capital was made by the defence out of the fact that in the report sent to the Surat Police Station it was said that the appellant had killed two persons, whereas the fact of the matter was that only one person was killed and one injured.
When Ratilal Deva, Soma Rama and Lalu Govind came out in the Angan they found Sariat Soma enquiring from the deceased Chhania Dhana as to what had happened and he told him that he was shot by the appellant who had injured both of them.
While the accused was running away, Sariat Soma lighted his torch and saw the accused with injuries on his head.
Thereafter the accused bolted away and while returning he dashed against the projected companyrugated iron sheets which were lying near the passage through which the accused fled away and sustained a small injury on the head.
55 stating that it was number in a position to produce Bai Bhani because she was under the protection of the appellant.
After a while all these persons companylected at the house of Lalu Govind where Chhania Dhana was already there.
As Ratilal Deva and Lalu Govind did number return to the house, the remaining members of the group, namely.
Even before this a telephonic message was sent to the Surat Police Station mentioning that the appellant had killed two persons by firing at them.
It appears that all these persons were interested in smuggling silver worth Rupees 34,00.000/ which they had hidden somewhere in the creek of the village sea shore.
34 lakhs in the creek of the sea shore and on the basis of that report the said silver was recovered.
In the companyrse of the altercation, Chhania Dhana is said to have assaulted Dita Lala and Makan Dita.
because by the time the accused reached the police station, Rijhsinghani had already received information about the appellant having shot the deceased and injured Naran.
Thereafter the P.S. I. Patel reached the spot, examined the witnesses and after companypleting the usual investigations submitted a charge sheet as a result of which the appellant was tried before the Sessions Judge, Surat, and acquitted by him, but on appeal he was companyvicted and sentenced as indicated above.
The main plank of the defence of the appellant was that he was on inimical terms with the prosecution witnesses, particularly Ratilal Deva and felt extremely offended because they had alleged that the appellant had reported to the police that Ratilal Deva and party had companycealed silver worth Rs.
As it was dark, a lantern was kept burning just near the Otta where the two witnesses were sitting.
The deceased Chhania Dhana however appears to have suffered merely because of his innocent intervention in the altercation between the appellant and Naran Kala the injured person.
however, an error of misdescription by the person who heard the telephone and does number appear to be of much companysequence.
Murtaza Fazal Ali, J. The appellant Soma Bhai Lala Bhai hereinafter referred to as Soma Lala was tried by the Sessions Judge, Surat for the charges under Sections 302, 303 and 201 I.P.C. as also under Sections 25 1 a and 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, but was acquitted of all the charges by the Sessions Judge by his order dated November 30.
It was thus alleged by the appellant that he was falsely implicated due to enmity.
The accused further alleged that some sort of altercation had taken place between Chhania Dhana and other persons near the house of Mitha Bava as a result of their smuggling activities in the companyrse of which Chhania Dhana was fatally assaulted and Naran was injured.
This case illustrates what disastrous companysequences smuggling activities can some times lead to.
All the substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run companycurrently.
