CR.A/71020/2002 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 710 of 2002 With CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 688 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== ASHOKBHAI RAMSINGH VASAVA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ====================================== Appearance : Criminal Appeal No.710 of 2002 MR HARSHAD J SHAH for the Appellant Ms Mita Panchal, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Criminal Appeal No.688 of 2002 Mr Y.N. Ravani for the Appellant Ms Mita Panchal, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State ====================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD CR.A/71020/2002 2/3 JUDGMENT and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Date : 24/12/2008 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD) The present appeals have been filed by the appellants – accused against the judgment and order dated 11th July 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Sessions Case No.65 of 2001 by which the appellants have been convicted under Seciton 302 read with Section 114 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo i rigorous imprisonment for life. Criminal Appeal No.710 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.1 whereas Criminal Appeal No.688 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the only evidence available on record to convict the accused – appellants is that they were last seen together on the date of the incident by the sister of the deceased. Apart from this, there is no other incriminating evidence. The deceased was in a drunken condition. So, a drunkard has been dealt with by whom is not coming on record. Against the present appellants it is only alleged that they were last seen together with the deceased in the vicinity of scene of occurrence without there being any connecting circumstances in the commission of crime. In that view of the matter, we are persuaded to give benefit of doubt to the accused – apellants because there is no connecting circumstances and no eye witnesses. The conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 read with Section 114 of IPC deserves to be set aside. So aslo their sentence deserves to be set aside. CR.A/71020/2002 3/3 JUDGMENT In the result, the appeals are ordered to be allowed. The conviction recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch by his judgment and order dated 11th July 2002 rendered in Sessions Case No.65 of 2001 is set aside. Accused No.1 – Ashokbhai Ramsingh Vasava is in jail. He is ordered to be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Fine paid, if any, by the accused No.1 is ordered to be refunded back to him. Accused No.2 – Dhaniben Manilal Vasava is on bail. Her bail bonds stand cancelled. (Bhagwati Prasad, J.) (Bankim N Mehta, J.) *mohd