R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 1222 of 2016

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No

==========================================================

AMARATBHAI @ KEVABHAI AAHAJI (DABHI)

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for the Appellant

MR RONAK RAVAL APP for the Respondent

==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

Date : 16/02/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1.This conviction appeal is directed against the judgment and order

of conviction dated 05.05.2016, passed by the learned 4

th

Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa at Palanpur, in connection with

Sessions Case No. 54 of 2015, by which, the sole accused Amarat

@ Kevabhai Aahaji (Dabhi) was convicted under Section 302

Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and

fine of Rs.1000/- and in default in payment of fine, to suffer simple

imprisonment of 3 months.

Page 1 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

2.The case of the prosecution, leading to conviction of the appellant

accused is as follows:

2.1The appellant accused was tried and prosecuted by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, on the charge of killing his wife –

Tinaben. According to prosecution case, on 05.01.2015, in the

midnight, the appellant accused stabbed his wife Tina for multiple

times, as a result, she succumbed to the injuries. The incident

occurred in the house of the accused situated at village: Pathawada,

Dantiwada, Palanpur. The marriage span was more than 15 years.

Since last 3 years, the deceased Tina along with son Nilesh and two

other kids were living in Ahmedabad at her parental home, because

the appellant accused being unemployed, used to ask the wife for

bringing money from her parental home, which was the ground to

live separately and there was serious matrimonial dispute between

the husband and wife. The deceased Tina had come to the house of

the accused and she was convinced by the husband that, after

sometime they will settle at Ahmedabad and for the purpose of

bringing all household articles, she along with his son Nilesh agreed

to come to the house of the accused. On the faithful day i.e.

05.01.2015, after completion of dinner, all went to sleep in one

room. In the midnight, the accused appellant took out the knife and

stabbed multiple times on the body of the deceased. The son minor

Nilesh aged about 10 years heard the screaming of the mother and

when he woke up, he did not find light in the house, and his father –

appellant – accused was standing beside his mother. The appellant

accused at that time, explained the son Nilesh that, she was having a

pain in the chest and he will take care. The son after hearing the

Page 2 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

explanation went into sleep. In the next day morning, the son Nilesh

PW-9, saw the dead body of her mother – Tina and father was not

found in the house. He had informed his maternal uncle and others

about the incident. After arrival of the family members from the

parental side, the FIR came to be lodged with Pathawada Police

Station, against the appellant accused for the offence of murder,

which was registered as CR No. I. 04 of 2015.

2.2The investigation was entrusted to handed over to the IO and during

the investigation, he drew the panchnama of the scene of

occurrence, arrested the accused, seized and recovered the cloths

and weapons on the basis of disclosure statement of the accused,

recorded the statement of the witnesses, sent the accused for

medical examination, forwarded the seized articles to the FSL,

obtained the reports from the FSL and after due investigation, the

chargesheet came to be filed against the accused for the offences

punishable under Sections 302 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.The case was committed to the Sessions Court. The trial Court

framed the charges, which the appellant accused denied the charges

and claimed to be tried.

4.The prosecution in order to examine the case against the accused,

examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 36 documents, as

per the below mentioned tabular.

Oral evidence :

PW 1 – Exh.10Kalubhai Gomabhai Chauhan, panch witness

PW 2 – Exh.12Natvarbhai Nenaji Bhand, panch witness

Page 3 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

PW 3 – Exh.21Kantilal Talkaji Pujani Koli

PW 4 – Exh.22Baldevbhai Cheharabhai Dabhi

PW 5 – Exh.27Hardaji Sajanji Koli

PW 6 – Exh.31Kanubhai Chelaji Chauhan, Complainant

PW 7 – Exh.33Kishorbhai Kanubhai Chauhan

PW 8 – Exh.34Rohitbhai Kanubhai Chauhan

PW 9 – Exh.35Nilesh Amaratbhai Dabhi

PW 10 – Exh.36Dr. Sureshbhai Dajabhai Patel

PW 11 – Exh.40Sunitraben Sonaji Punamaji Marvadi, panch

witness

PW 12 – Exh.41Ranchhodbhai Navalbhai Chauhan

PW 13 – Exh.42Dr. Navinbhai Hemabhai Chaudhary

PW 14 – Exh.45Faljibhai Raghnathbhai Chaudhary

PW 15 – Exh.47Navinbhai Jivabhai Bhagora

PW 16 – Exh.50Nanjibhai Premjibhai Chhaya

PW 17 – Exh.61Vanrajsinh Raghuvirsinh Chavada

Documentary evidence :

Exh.11 Inquest Panchnama

Exh.13 Panch slip A1

Exh.14 Panch slip A2

Exh.15 Panch slip A3

Exh.16 Panch slip A4

Exh.17 Panchnama of place of offence

Exh.18 Discovery Panchnama

Exh.19 Panch slip A12

Exh.20 Panch slip A13

Exh.23 Panch slip A7

Exh.24 Panch slip A5

Exh.25 Panch slip A6

Exh.26 Panchnama of deceased clothes and Knife

Exh.28 Panchnama of state of body of accused

Exh.32 Complaint

Exh.37 PM Report

Exh.39 Letter regarding handing over of blood sample for

forensic investigation to the Head constable of

Pathavada Police station

Page 4 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

Exh.38 PM Yadi

Exh.43 Injury certificate of accused

Exh.44 Yadi for medical examination of accused

Exh.46 Acknowledgement of handing over of dead body of

Teenaben

Exh.48 Suchipatra

Exh.49 Report of grievous offence

Exh.51 Inquest yadi to Executive Magistrate

Exh.52 Form B for PM

Exh.53 Forwarding letter

Exh.54 Acknowledgement of receiving of dead body for

cremation

Exh.55 Yadi for call detail of Mobile No. 9909863645

Exh.56 Finger print report

Exh.57 Forwarding letter FSL

Exh.58 Yadi for map of place of offence

Exh.62 Receipt of articles by FSL

Exh.63 Receipt of articles by FSL

Exh.64 FSL report

Exh.65 Serological report

Exh.66 Serological report

5.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the appellant accused

was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and his defense was total

denial and despite of the opportunity given to him, he did not

adduce any evidence in his defense.

6.The learned trial Court after considering the oral and documentary

evidence, as well as the submissions made on behalf of the parties,

found the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal

Code and sentenced him as indicated above.

7.Being aggrieved by, and dissatisfied with the judgment of

conviction and sentence, the appellant has come up with present

Page 5 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

appeal.

8.Evidence adduced by the prosecution:

We would like to have a cursory look at the evidence

adduced by the prosecution through its witnesses:

8.1Dr. Suresh Patel (PW.10) : This witness being a Medical

Officer, Pathawada CHC, had conducted post-mortem on the body

of the deceased. During the post-mortem, the witness had noticed

the following external and internal injuries:

External Injuries:

1.Left Hand:

1.Incised wound of 5x1x1 cm in inner aspect of hand

2.Incised wound of 5x1x2 cm in inner aspect of hand

3.Incised wound between middle and ring finger

4.Incised wound of 5x1x2 cm in exterior aspect of

forearm

5.Small incised wound at dorsum of left hand

2.Right Hand:

1.Incised wound of 5x1x3 cm on right

axilla

2.Incised wound of 5x1x2 cm on upper arm

anterior aspect

3.Incised wound of 5x1x3 cm on Right

shoulder

4.Incised wound of 5x1x4 cm on inner

aspect of axilla weapon injury on right side of

chest ‘S’ shaped, 15 cm deep in blood staired

stabbed, 5x1x15 cm deep on the right chest in

Page 6 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

upper inner quadrant of the right breast in 3rd

Intercostal space

Internal Injuries:

1.# of 3

rd

rib & dislocation of constrochordal junction

in 3

rd

ICS

2.Right side skin, chest anterior, and muscle pierced

3.Right side pierced and pale, stained with blood

4.Pale & pierced incised at middle lobe

5.Right side filled with blood and blood clotting of 1-1.5

ltrs

Cause of death: Death due to Hemorrhagic shock due to

injury to right lung”

In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death due to

hemorrhagic shock on account of injury sustained on right lung.

The weapon knife was found in the chest of the deceased and same

was handed over to the police constable and accordingly, by way

of panchnama, the weapon as well as blood stained clothes of the

deceased being seized and recovered by the police. It is further

opined by the doctor that, all the injuries found on the body of the

deceased could be possible by sharp edge weapon and upon seeing

the knife from the court record, the witness agreed to the

suggestion asked to him that, the injuries could be possible with

this weapon. Nothing material being asked by the defense to

substantiate the opinion of the cause of death and the weapon

knife.

8.2Nilesh Dabhi (PW.9) : This witness is the son of the deceased as

well as the appellant-accused and at the time of incident, his age

Page 7 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

was 10 to 11 years old. The trial court made an inquiry about his

competency to understand the proposed questions as well as the

court proceedings on the aspect of administering the oath before

recording his evidence. The trial court was satisfied about the

maturity of the witness, as a result, without administering the oath,

his evidence was recorded. It is not in dispute that, before the

incident, the deceased and her three kids, due to matrimonial

dispute, had been living at Ahmedabad with the maternal

grandfather and others. As a part of compromise, it was decided

between the husband and wife that, they would take the house on

rent in Ahmedabad and start living independently. In order to settle

at Ahmedabad, the deceased was called at Village: Pathawada to

bring back the household things, as a result, on 05.01.2015, by

public transport, the deceased along with present witness Nilesh

reached at Pathawada in the afternoon. After completion of dinner

at about 8:00 p.m., the appellant-accused and son Nilesh went into

sleep together in the cot, whereas, the deceased took her position at

the floor of the house and went to sleep. In these admitted

background facts, now let us examine the oral evidence of witness

with regard to what happened on the fateful night.

The witness Nilesh has stated in his chief-examination that,

in the late night, he had heard the screaming of his mother and he

woke up and tried to switch on the light, but, it could not turn on

and he could visualize the face of the appellant-father who was

standing near the cot and after his wake up, the father appellant

told that, his mother was having a chest pain and that is why she is

Page 8 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

screaming and he should not worry about it and asked him to sleep

on the cot. The witness has further stated that, thereafter he went

into sleep and in the morning, when he woke up, he saw the dead

body of his mother lying on the floor with multiple injuries on her

body and had seen one knife in her chest. The witness has further

stated that, his uncle Mohanbhai give him solace and convinced

that, his mother has been killed. The witness has further stated that,

his uncle informed his maternal grandparents and others about the

incident and later on, after his preliminary inquiry by the police,

the FIR at the instance of his maternal grandfather (PW.6) came to

be registered with Pathawada Police Station. The witness has

further stated that, he had narrated the entire incident to his

grandparents, maternal grand uncle and others. The witness is able

to identify the knife from the court records.

In the cross-examination, it was tried by the defense that the

deceased has relations with someone and living in live-in-

relationship at Surat. However, the witness has not admitted the

said defense and his evidence in the cross-examination on the

aspect of incident has not been shaken.

8.3Kanu Chelaji Chauhan (PW.6) : This witness is the father of

the deceased and he is resident of Ahmedabad. In his chief-

examination, the witness has stated that, on the day of incident, his

daughter had proceeded to Village: Pathawada as the appellant-

accused wants to settle the matrimonial dispute and had expressed

his willingness to live at Ahmedabad in a rented house. The

Page 9 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

deceased daughter and son Nilesh for the purpose of bringing back

the household things, had gone to Pathawada at the house of the

appellant-accused. The witness has further stated that, since last 6

to 7 years, the marriage life of his daughter was disturbed and he

had made every possible attempt to settle their lives and also

helped financially to the accused. The witness has further stated

that, the elder brother of the accused informed him about the

incident and after receiving the information, he along with other

family members came to Village: Pathawada and met his nephew

(PW.9) Nilesh and being an eye witness, he narrated the entire

incident to him. On the basis of such information, he being a father

of the deceased, it is stated by him that, he lodged an FIR with

Pathawada Police Station which he has produced at Exh.32. The

witness is identifying the accused in the court. In the cross-

examination, the defense has tried to establish that, the deceased

does not want to live with the appellant-accused because of her

live-in-relationship with third person. However, the witness has not

admitted the said things. In the cross-examination, the questions

were being asked, on the aspect of settlement through community

leader and same replied positively by the witness. However, on the

information received by him on the aspect of incident, his evidence

is not shaken in cross-examination.

8.4Rohit Chauhan (PW.8) & Kishor Chauhan (PW.7) : Both

these witnesses are the brothers of the deceased and sons of the

complainant (PW.1). The witnesses are not eye witness of the

Page 10 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

incident and they are deposing against the accused whatever facts

disclosed by their nephew (PW.9).

8.5Dr. Navin Chaudhary (PW.13) : This witness was posted as

Medical Officer with CHC, Pathawada and being a Medical

Officer, he had examined the appellant-accused after his arrest on

07.01.2015. The accused-appellant was referred to witness with

Police Yadi and upon his examination, the witness has noted that,

there was a cut mark on right index finger of his hand. The

certificate thereof is produced by the witness at Exh.43.

8.6Nanjibhai Premjibhai Chhaya (PW.16) : This witness had been

entrusted with the investigation of the case as at relevant time, he

was serving as PSI with Pathawada Police Station. The witness has

stated in his chief-examination that, after registration of the

offence, he came into charge of investigation of the case and

during the investigation, he went to the place of occurrence and

obtained necessary samples by drawing the panchnama, and also

did the proceedings of P.M. of the deceased. The witness had

stated that, he arrested the accused and during the custody and

upon his disclosure statement, seized and recovered the blood stain

clothes of the accused, recovered and seized the knife allegedly

found on the body of the deceased by the doctor, recorded the

statements of the witnesses, sent the seized articles to the FSL and

after receiving the report, the chargesheet for the offence of murder

and offence of cruelty was being filed against the accused-

appellant. In the cross-examination, except denial, nothing fruitful

Page 11 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

brought on record to substantiate the allegations made against the

accused. The I.O. in the cross-examination, was not agreed with

the defense theory that, deceased was having affair with someone

and that is why, he was killed by her lover.

Submissions:

9.We have heard learned counsel Mr. Pratik Barot appearing for and

on behalf of the appellant-accused and Mr. Ronak Raval, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

10.Mr. Pratik Barot, learned counsel while assailing the impugned

judgment of conviction and order of sentence, has urged that:

(a)Prosecution has failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt

as it is fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that the

accused is presumed to be innocent till proven guilty. In the

present case, the available witness (PW.9) though he was present

in the room where the incident occurred, he did not with all

certainty has stated that, his father was the author of the crime and

therefore, his evidence, in absence of any corroboration from the

independent source, does not inspire confidence and on the basis of

his sole testimony, the conviction is not sustainable in eye of law.

(b)The learned trial court grossly erred while convicting the accused

without appreciating the evidence in right prospective. The age of

PW.9 at relevant time, was admittedly between 9 to 10 years. The

child witness (PW.9) before the incident, was under influence of

his maternal grandparents and maternal uncle as the witness was

Page 12 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

living with them at Ahmedabad and in that view of the matter, his

evidence shows that, the child was acting under the influence of

the other witnesses and the possibility of tutoring cannot be ruled

out and therefore, his testimony without independent

corroboration, cannot be accepted as truthful and basis for the

conviction.

(c)That, the discovery and seizure of the clothes in terms of Section

27 of The Evidence Act has not been proved as procedure

prescribed in the law. The panch witnesses of discovery of the

clothes (Exh.18) have not supported to the prosecution case. The

I.O. of the case failed to depose the exact words spoken by the

accused about admitting the factum of clothes and also failed to

prove the contents of the panchnama and therefore, the FSL

evidence on the aspect of matching of blood group with respect to

clothes pointing finger to the involvement of the accused cannot be

relied and acted upon for corroboration to the evidence of PW.9.

(d)The recovery of knife over the body of the deceased has also been

not proved as the panchas of the panchnama (Exh.26) have not

stated the contents of the panchnama and the Head Constable who

had produced the knife, allegedly obtained from the P.M. Doctor,

has not been examined which clearly shows that, the recovery of

knife has not been proved in accordance with law and on that

aspect, the FSL evidence cannot be considered and admitted in

evidence.

(e)That, in the present case, the appellant is charged with offence of

murder on account of dispute and differences with his wife over his

Page 13 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

unemployment and demand of money, which resulted into act of

cruelty and harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused from

the charge of cruelty. There was specific defense that, the deceased

during 3 to 4 years, lived at Surat with another person and after the

settlement and arrival of the deceased at the matrimonial home, the

third person, as a part of revenge, committed the offence of

murder. Thus, on the day of incident, there was no motive on the

part of the appellant-accused to kill the deceased and therefore, in

absence of motive, the charge of murder is not sustainable in law.

11.In such circumstances as referred above, Mr. Pratik Barot, learned

counsel prayed that, there being merits in this appeal and same

may be allowed and further requested that, the order of conviction

and sentence be set aside and appellant may be acquitted of charge

of murder.

12.Alternatively, it was submitted by Mr. Barot that, there was

matrimonial dispute on the aspect of unemployment of the accused

and on day to day household expenses, the dispute being arose

between the parties and that is why, the deceased deserved the

husband – appellant and used to stay at parental home. In such

circumstances, when there is a single fatal injury of the lungs

which shows that, the act was not intended to cause death and it

was result of grave and sudden provocation and in hit of passion,

without premeditation, upon a sudden quarrel, the act was done. In

that view of the matter, it was submitted that, the offence

committed by the appellant amounted to culpable homicide not

amounting to murder punishable under Section 304 Part II Indian

Page 14 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

Penal Code and further requested to set aside the sentence of life

imprisonment and alter the conviction from Section 302 to Section

304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.

13.On the other hand, while opposing the appeal, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor Mr. Ronak Raval, contended that, the accused-

appellant called the deceased from Ahmedabad to his village and

in the midnight, stabbed the deceased multiple times. At the time

of incident, there was no provocation on the part of the deceased,

nor any dispute arose on the aspect of household expense. In such

circumstances, considering the injury which was caused on the

vital part of the body and other injuries would establish that, the act

was intended to done to cause death of the deceased. The weapon

knife was found from the lungs of the deceased. The accused in the

midnight, after the incident, when the child witness (PW.9) woke

up in anxiety, he had falsely convinced the child witness that the

deceased was having a chest pain. In such circumstances, the

injuries found on the body are sufficient in ordinary course of

nature to cause death and the accused intended to inflict that

particular injury and it was not his defense that, it was intended to

inflict on the other part of the body. On this aspect, the testimony

of PW.9 is sufficient to prove the charge of murder as except PW.9

and the accused, no one was present in the house and so far as

defense part is concerned, the accused failed to mention the name

of specific person with whom the deceased was having extra

marital affair. In such circumstances, it was submitted that, the

evidence of child witness does inspires confidence and nothing

brought on record to suggest that on account of tutoring by

Page 15 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

someone, or with bias, he is deposing against the accused. There

was no any explanation of the accused that, he was not present at

the home and therefore, non-explanation of special circumstances

by the accused would further strengthen the prosecution case.

14.In such circumstances, the State counsel has submitted that, the

prosecution has successfully proved the charge of murder against

the accused beyond reasonable doubt and as such, trial court has

not committed any error while holding the accused guilty for the

offence and thus, it was prayed that, there being no merits in the

appeal and same may be dismissed.

15.We have heard at length learned counsel for the respective parties,

perused the impugned judgment and case records.

16.The prosecution case hinges upon the sole testimony of PW.9 –

Nilesh Dabhi. The witness is son of the appellant. It is not in

dispute that, the death was not homicidal in nature and therefore,

the prosecution in our opinion, proves and establishes that, the

death of the deceased was homicidal.

17.In the facts of the present case, the relationship of the parties is not

in dispute. On the day of incident, 05.01.2015, in the afternoon, the

deceased Tina along with son Nilesh aged about 9 years, came to

Village: Pathawada as the appellant-accused called them so that,

they can settle in Ahmedabad for which the household things are

necessary to transport from village to Ahmedabad and for that

purpose, she had been called by the accused. The accused-

appellant was having an independent house in the area of

“Harijanvas” at Pathawada Village and except appellant-accused,

Page 16 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

no one of his family members were residing with him. Admittedly,

on the day of incident, the evening meal cooked by the deceased

and at the time of taking dinner, no quarrel was being arise on the

aspect of money matter or other things which issues were the core

of the matrimonial dispute and after taking meal, all happily went

into sleep. The deceased preferred to sleep on the floor, whereas

the appellant and child witness (PW.9) had took their sleep on cot.

18.In the aforesaid admitted background facts as referred in para-17 of

this judgment, the question that falls for our consideration as to

whether the appellant-accused had caused fatal injury to the

deceased or not.

19.As noted, the prosecution case hinges upon the sole testimony of

PW:9 Nilesh Dabhi, who is the child witness, aged about 9 years.

The Trial Court before recording his evidence, made inquiry about

his competence to understand the sanctity of oath to be

administered and to understand the majority level, questions were

being asked to witness and after satisfying on the aspect of his

maturity, recorded reasons in brief and proceeded to record

evidence without administering the oath to him. Therefore, the

Trial Court has followed the procedure while recording the

evidence of child witness. It is settled position of law that the

evidence of child witness has to be subjected to close scrutiny and

can be accepted only if the Court comes to a conclusion that the

child understands the question put to him and he is capable of

giving rational answers. A child witness by reasons of his tender

age is pliable witness. He can be tutored easily either by threat,

Page 17 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

coercion or inducement. Therefore, the Supreme Court in its

various judgments, held and observed that the Court must be

satisfied that the attendant circumstances do not show that the child

was acting under the influence of someone or was under threat or

coercion. The evidence of child witness may require corroboration,

but in case his deposition inspires the confidence of the Court and

there is no embellishment or improvement therein, the Court can

rely upon his evidence. The evidence of child witness and its

credibility would depend upon the circumstances of each case. The

only precaution which the Court has to bear in mind while

assessing the evidence of child witness is that the victim must be

reliable one because the law recognizes the child is a competent

witness.

20.In light of the aforesaid law, and applying to the facts of the

present case, we are of the opinion that the evidence of Nilesh

Dabhi – PW:9 being a son of the deceased is truthful and reliable

and his conduct at the relevant time and after the incident, was

most natural and nothing being found that he is telling lie under the

emotion or under the pressure of complainant and others. Upon

close scrutiny of the evidence, it transpires that despite of his

presence at the place, he could not intervene because the appellant

accused was very much presence at the place and light was off and

the father appellant asked him to go to sleep and he was convinced

that his mother was screaming because of chest pain as told to him

by the accused appellant. Even otherwise, any child being aged

about 9 years, in a situation like this, would not have dared to

confront the appellant father, even after knowing the alleged act of

Page 18 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

killing. We take a notice of the fact that in the midnight, except

father and PW:9, no one was present in the house. The presence of

the appellant accused has not been denied by him. Even otherwise

also, his presence is proved and established by the evidence of

PW:9. In the midnight, if the wife would have suffered the chest

pain, then the natural conduct would be to take her nearby the

hospital or to seek necessary assistance from the neighbourhood.

The appellant accused had pleaded that the third person with whom

deceased was having relations, had come in the night and killed

her. If the theory of the defence believed to be true, then why the

husband appellant did not try to save her from the clutches of third

person. No any complaint against the third person being lodged by

him. On the contrary, leaving the dead body, the accused after the

incident, putting the knife in the chest, ran away from the place of

occurrence. Even he was having opportunity to inform his in-laws

about causing fatal injuries by third person. In such circumstances,

there is no reason why the witness son PW:9 would tell lie against

the appellant accused. It is not the prosecution case that in the

midnight, after hearing the hue and cry, the persons from the

neighbourhood, came at the place of incident. In such

circumstances, it is difficult for the prosecution to get independent

corroboration to the evidence of PW:9 child witness.

21.For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the evidence of child

witness on the aspect of his presence at the place and the facts

about seeing the appellant accused in the midnight in the room

where the deceased was sleeping and hearing the screaming of

mother as stated are truthful, reliable and does inspire confidence

Page 19 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

that his evidence having a ring of truth and in absence of any

material contradiction or improvement on the aspect of presence of

the appellant and the incident of midnight, the prosecution

succeeded in proving the facts that at the commission of the crime,

the deceased and the appellant along with PW:9 found in the one

room where the incident took place and the very house belongs to

the accused appellant. In such circumstances, now the burden shift

on the accused to explain how the wife received injuries. The

accused failed to offer any explanation about such injuries by the

deceased and the defence of killing by third person is found to be

false and considering his conduct after incident, indicates that the

appellant accused is the responsible for the commission of the

crime.

22.Thus, therefore, the result of the aforesaid discussion would be that

the prosecution has proved and established that on 05.01.2015 in

the night hours, the deceased was stabbed to death by accused

appellant and motive is apparent on record that there was a

matrimonial dispute between husband and wife and even

otherwise, when the appellant armed with dangerous weapon was

present and he is found to be an author of the crime, the

establishment of any motive is absolutely in consequential.

23.The next question that arises for consideration is whether the

accused appellant is guilty for the offence of murder or death cause

was culpable homicide not amount to murder under Section 304

Indian Penal Code ?

Page 20 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

24.We have carefully examined the oral as well as medical evidence.

Since the death of the deceased Tina is not denied and it has been

proved on the basis of the record that, the appellant accused had

caused death of his wife by stabbing her multiple times with the

weapon knife. The blood stained cloths and the weapon knife

matches with the blood of the deceased. In such circumstances, the

next question for consideration, whether trial Court was justified in

convicting the appellant accused for the murder as defined under

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code?

25.Before proceed further, we may refer the necessary penal provision

like Section 300. Section 300 provides that culpable homicide is

‘murder’, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the

intention of causing death or if it is done with the intention of

causing such bodily injury, as the offender knows to be likely to

cause death or if it is done with the intention of causing bodily

injury and the said injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in

ordinary course of nature to cause death or the accused knows that,

it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, caused

death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

26.It is the prosecution to prove the case against the accused that he has

committed ‘murder’ as defined under Section 300 of the Indian Pe-

nal Code. It is settled position of law that, to render the conviction

under murder, the case must fall within the provisions of Clauses I,

II and III and IV of Section 300 and must now fall within any one of

the five exceptions attached thereto.

27. In the present case, the cause of death was hemorrhagic shock due to

Page 21 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

injuries on the right lungs. So far as external injuries are concerned,

five incise wounds found on the left hand of the deceased and five

incise wounds presence on the right hand with an injury of disloca-

tion of shoulder. So far as internal injuries are concerned, the PM

doctor noted multiple ribs fractures and the rupture of lungs and the

injury found deep incised upto the middle lob. Thus, it can be said

that, the fatal injuries found on the vital part of the body and the

lungs were completely torn up and deceased was collapsed on the

spot. The injuries were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to

cause death. In these background facts, the defense has submitted

that, there was a single fatal blow and considering the matrimonial

dispute and the financial dispute for day to day livelihood, in a hit of

passion and sudden quarrel, the act was done and therefore, it was

emphasized that, act was not done with intention of causing such fa-

tal injury. In order to gathered the intention or guilty knowledge, the

surrounding circumstances and the manner in which the murder was

executed required to be considered. In the facts of the present case,

the incident of murder occurred on 05.01.2015 in the midnight. The

appellant accused and minor son PW-9 were sleeping on the cot and

the deceased went into sleep and preferred a floor of the house and

in the same room, all were sleeping. Admittedly, no any other per-

sons were living in the house. The appellant was unemployed and

there was a matrimonial dispute on the aspect of day to day liveli-

hood and that is why, the deceased had deserted the husband – ap-

pellant and chosen to live with the at parental home. The appellant

under the guise of settlement, called the deceased at village:

Pathawada. On the day of incident in the noon, the deceased and her

Page 22 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

minor son PW-9, came to village: Pathawada from Ahmedabad so

that, for the settlement at Ahmedabad, they could bring back the

household things with them. In the night hours, there was no quarrel

arose on any of the issue and the deceased was not aware about the

intention of the accused. The time of the offence was midnight. The

appellant used the weapon knife and abruptly stabbed the deceased

for multiple times and one of the blow directly hit the lungs. In such

circumstances, the reasonable inference could arise that, the act was

done with an intention to cause death and causing such bodily

injury, which was likely to cause death and the injuries were

intended to be inflicted were sufficient in ordinary course to cause

death and inflicting the blow on the lungs, it can be presumed that

the accused knew the probable result of his conduct and therefore, in

our opinion, it cannot be said that, on the fateful night, due to matri-

monial dispute, the appellant accused deprived of power of self con-

trol by grave and sudden provocation or without any premeditation

in a sudden fight in hit of passion, upon sudden quarrel, the fatal in-

juries were being caused.

28.For the discussions as mentioned hereinabove, we come to a conclu-

sion that, the act of the accused fall within the clause thirdly and

fourthly of Section 300 of Indian Penal Code and would not fall in

any exception to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code and same is

read as under:

“Section 300 : xxxxxx

Secondly, .........…

Thirdly, : if it is done with intention of causing bodily injury

Page 23 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

to any person, and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted

is sufficient in the ordinary course of action to cause death

or

Fourthly, - if the person committing the act knows that, it is

so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability, cause

death or such bodily injury as it likely to cause death and

commit such an act, without any excuse for incurring the

risk of causing death or such injuries as aforesaid.”

29.The one of the contentions raised is that, there was a single blow

found on the lungs of the deceased and the admitted facts of matri-

monial dispute as described in the charge, had been contributory fac-

tor and same may be considered for alteration of the sentence. We

are not impressed with the submission as it is settled position of law

that, there cannot be said as a rule of universal application that

whenever one blow is given, application of Section 302 of Indian

Penal Code will be ruled out and that, even a single blow delivered

with a dangerous weapon on the vital part of the body, would make

the offence of murder on a peculiar facts of the each case. In the

present case, as discussed above, the act was premeditated and that

is why, the accused chosen the peculiar time for committing the of-

fence and that too, when the deceased was defenseless and was in a

sleeping mode.

30.In view of the aforesaid discussions, after re-analysis and re-appreci-

ation of the evidence and on perusal of the impugned judgment of

conviction, we are satisfied that, prosecution has proved its case

with sufficient oral and documentary evidence, beyond all reason-

Page 24 of 25

R/CR.A/1222/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/02/2026

able doubt, that the appellant was the author of the crime and the

trial Court has rightly found the appellant accused guilty for act of

murder punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the

IPC. We do not find any scope for interference with the findings of

conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.

31. In the result, this conviction appeals being Criminal Appeal No. 1222

of 2016 stands dismissed. R&P, if any, be sent back to the trial

Court forthwith.

(ILESH J. VORA,J)

(R. T. VACHHANI, J)

P.S. JOSHI

Page 25 of 25