Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9
PETITIONER:
STATE OF GUJARAT CHANDUBHAI MALUBHAI PARMAR & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
CHANDUBHAI MALUBHAI PARMAR & ORS. STATE OF GUJARAT
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/04/1997
BENCH:
M.K. MUKHERJEE, S.P. KURDUKAR
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 354 OF 1987
J U D G M E N T
S.P. KURDUKAR, J.
People belonging to Vankar community residing in
village Golana in District Khera (Gujarat) had an awful day
when they saw some of their fellow Vankars being chased,
four of them killed and many others injured by a riotous mob
comprising Rajputs, Harijans and other persons residing in
the same village. The incident in question took place on
25.1.1986.
(2) The genesis of this incident was a dispute over a plot
of land, which according to the Vankar Community was
allotted to it by the Government of Gujarat under a scheme
called allotment of plots to landless persons for
construction of houses. The Harijans, however carried the
belief that part of the said plot was given to and reserved
for them by the Government for constructing their houses. it
was this misunderstanding between the two communities viz.,
the harijans and Vankars which led to the incident in
question . According to the prosecution, on 25.1.1986 at
about 8 a.m. the accused Nos. 1,2,3,5,39 and Lakhabhai
(deceased) had gone to this land with some construction
materials for the purposes of erecting poles and
construction of huts thereon. These accused persons
initially requested the Vankars to desist from making
unauthorised construction but realising that Vankars were
not agreeable, accused No.1 tried to attack Itchabhai with a
Dharia and while warding off the said attack he sustained an
injury between his thumb and finger. The above accused
persons thereafter left the place.
(3) Pochabhai, the complainant then decided to go to
Khambat Police Station to lodge a complaint and, therefore,
they came to the bus stand along with injured Itchabhai.
They hired a truck to go to Khambat Police Station. In the
meantime many persons belonging to Harijan and Rajput
communities came to the bus stand, armed with deadly weapons
and started raising shouts "beat Vankars". it is alleged by
the prosecution that accused Nos. 19,20,21 were armed with
guns., Accused No. 22 was carrying dharia and other accused
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9
persons were armed with sticks, dantas, kodali etc. These
accused persons thereafter pulled down the Vankars who were
sitting in the cabin of the lorry and started abusing them.
They encircled the truck. The other Vankars who were sitting
in the rear portion of the truck, sensing a serious trouble,
got down and started running towards their locality called
Vankarvas. The riotous mob then started chasing them. This
incident took place at about 9.30 a.m.
(4) It was alleged by the prosecution that in the meantime
many residents of village Golana belonging to the accused
party armed with deadly weapons came in direction of
Vankarvas where these Vankars were running to their
respective houses. The riotous mob consisting of 100/150
persons started chasing Vankars, of them some entered into
the houses of Vankars. Accused Nos. 19, 20 and 21 who were
members of the riotous mob fired at Vankars as a result of
which Prabhudas and Pochabhai sustained gun shot injuries
and died on the spot. Other members of the unlawful assembly
assaulted Mohanbhai and Khodabhai with sharp edged weapons
and sticks as a result of which they also died on the spot.
In addition to these four deaths 13 persons belonging to
Vankar community also sustained injuries during the said
assault.
(5) The other members of the unlawful assembly who had
forcibly entered into the houses of Vankars had damaged
their houses by throwing stones and committed theft of their
belongings and thereafter set the houses on fire in which
the inmates of these houses sustained injuries.
(6) The prosecution then alleged that the three incidents
at three different places, namely, at Khalwat, at bus stand
and at Vankarvas formed one transaction.
(7) It appears that a report of disturbance reached the
Senior PSI of Khambat police Station within a short time
and, therefore, Shri Dhani, CPI arrived at village Golana in
the afternoon and went to Vankarvas where he recorded the
complaint of Pochabhai Kalabhai (Ex.203). CPI then returned
to Khambat Police Station, registered the offence and left
for the place of occurrence at about 5.00 p.m. and commenced
the investigation. He recorded the statement of eye
witnesses and also arrested the accused. The accused Nos. 1
to 4 and 39 belong to Harijan community. The accused No. 5
died during the pendency of trial, A-10 is Kumbhar, A-11 to
17 are Vaghris, A-18 is Vala and remaining 27 accused
persons are Rajputs. This is how all 41 accused persons
came to be arrested in the present crime. CPI Dhami
submitted the charge-sheet against 41 accused persons in the
Court of Judicial magistrate First Class. After about three
months he submitted a report to the Court and sought
permission to add charge under Section 3 of the Terrorist
and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 (for short
the ‘TADA’) and the said prayer was granted. This was how 41
accused persons came to be charge sheeted for offences
punishable under sections
147,148,452,302,307,325,324,323,396,397,398,436,and 427/149
IPC, under section 3 of TADA and also under Section 25(1)(c)
of the Arms Act. The Criminal case was then committed to the
Designated Court of Kheda at Nadiad for trial.
(8) The accused denied the accusations made against them
and in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C
they stated that they have been falsely implicated in the
present crime because of rivalry between the two groups
viz., Vankars on one hand and the Rajputs, Harijans etc.,
etc., on the other hand. They claimed that they were
innocent and accordingly prayed that they be acquitted.
(9) The prosecution in support of its case examined a
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9
number of witnesses including 31 eye witnesses of whom 13
were injured. In addition to this evidence prosecution also
examined medical officers who performed the post mortem
examination on the dead bodies. Injury certificates of
injured witnesses and various panchnamas were also produced
on record. The Learned Designated Court on appraisal of oral
and documentary evidence on record concluded that 18
arraigned accused along with many other unidentified persons
belonging to the rival group formed an unlawful assembly
with a common object to assault Vankars and in prosecution
thereof two were shot dead and two sustained several incised
injuries and died on the spot; caused injuries to 13 eye
witnesses; committed theft of belongings of Vankaras and set
three houses on fire. The learned trial judge convicted and
sentenced 14 accused persons/appellants before us on various
counts and sentenced them to undergo various terms of
sentences and fines including life imprisonment under
section 302/149 IpC. Four accused persons were convicted for
minor offences who did not choose to file an appeal and,
therefore, details thereof are not set out. The trial court
however, found the evidence adduced by the prosecution was
not sufficient to convict the remaining 23 accused persons
and accordingly recorded the order of acquittal in their
favour. All accused persons were also acquitted of charge
under section 3 of TADA. The impugned order is dated
12.6.1987. It is this judgment and order of conviction which
is the subject matter of challenge in Criminal Appeal No. 95
of 1988 filed by the appellants - accused. The State of
Gujarat has filed criminal Appeal No. 354 of 1987 against 18
accused persons challenging the order of acquittal. Since
these appeals arise out of a common judgment, they are being
disposed of by this Judgment.
(10) At the outset it may be stated that prosecution
witnesses can be divided into three groups, (1) witnesses
to the incident at Khalwat, (2) witnesses relating to the
assault on Vankars at bus stand and (3) witnesses who
testified to the chasing of Vankers and causing assault on
them with deadly weapons, committing theft and setting the
houses on fire.
(11) Mr. T.U. Mehta, the learned Senior Counsel appearing in
support of the criminal appeal filed by the convicts urged
that the prosecution story is not all trustworthy. The
prosecution evidence as to what happened at the bus stand
was totally untrustworthy inasmuch as the ocular evidence
thereof was propped up by the missionaries to gain favour
from vankars. He urged that in fact the missionaries had
played a very vital role to support the prosecution case by
falsely implicating the appellants. he then urged that the
identification of the accused persons sought to be
established in the court was totally unreliable because it
was impossible for any of the prosecution witnesses could be
accepted then at best each of the accused would be held
liable for his individual act. He urged that there was non
unlawful assembly and even if there was one, it did not
share any common object to commit the murders of or assault
any of the Vankars. he further submitted that prosecution
witnesses were partisan witnesses and it was not safe to
accept their evidence as credible. He then submitted that it
was not clear from the evidence of prosecution witnesses as
to who were the accused who chased the vankars and caused
the death of four persons and injured many. He therefore,
urged that the conviction of original accused Nos. 34 , 35
and 36 under sections 302/149 was unsustainable. The
conviction of the appellants under sections 309/149 of the
Indian penal Code was bad and at the most if identity of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9
assailants could be established vis-a-vis their alleged acts
they could be convicted for their own individual acts and
not with the aid of Section 149 of IPC.
(12) Before we deal with the aforesaid submissions raised
before us on behalf of the appellants and determine the
involvement and complicity of each of the appellants in the
present crime we may broadly indicate the substratum of the
prosecution case. Village Golana where the incident took
place is mainly consisted of Rajputs Harijans and Vankars.
In the present episode Rajputs, Harijans were on one side
and Vankars on the other . Initially a dispute arose over
the allotment of the land to vankars for which the harijans
laid a claim under the belief that it was reserved and
earmarked for them. Some of the vankars had constructed the
houses on this land which was objected to by Harijans. On
25.1.1986 some of the Harijans went to the disputed land and
questioned the right of Vankars to carry on the construction
of house thereon. It was alleged by the prosecution that
there was some altercation between the two groups resulting
into causing an injury to Itchabhai Lalbhai by means of a
dharia. Vankars came to the bus stand hired a truck to go to
the police station and lodge a complaint. They boarded the
truck . In the meantime Harijans had gone to the abadi and
returned to the bus stand along with a few Rajputs and
other fellowmen. Some altercation took place between
Pochabhai Kalabhai, Khorabhai, Mittanbhai, Itchabhai
Lalbhai, Kalabhai, Nathabhai, Premjibhai Shyambhai and the
Rajputs. Vankars Who were sitting in the truck got down and
sensing a danger to their lives at the hands of Rajputs who
had gathered there, started running towards Vankarvas where
they were residing. In the meantime more than 100 persons
belonging to Rajput Community and their supporters came at
the bus stand and chased the persons belonging to Vankar
community. The members of the riotous mob were armed with
deadly weapons like fire arms, dharia, lathis etc. Of them
A-19, A-20 and A-21 were carrying the fire arms. The common
object of the riotous mob was to cause fatal injuries to
persons belonging to Vankar community, destroy the houses by
fire and to commit robberies and create terror. In pursuit
of the said common object and while chasing these Vankars,
they assaulted Prabhudas, Pochabhai, khorabhai and Mohanbhai
with deadly weapons. Prabhubhai, Khorabhai and Mohanbhai
with deadly weapons. Prabhubhai and pochabhai sustained gun
shot injuries and other injuries causing their instantaneous
deaths. Khodabhai and Mohanbhai were assaulted with deadly
weapons causing incised and lacerated wounds to them as
result of which both these brothers died on the spot. A-34,
A-35 and A-36 entered and ransacked the houses of Vinodbhai
S/o Vallabhbhai, Balabhai s/o Rhulabhai and Vallabhbhai S/O
Phulabhai and thereafter burnt down their houses. Many
prosecution witnesses were injured in the incident. It may
also be stated that as far as A-34, A-35 and A-36 are
concerned the role attributed to them in the present
incident was mainly confined to ransacking and setting t he
three houses of Vankars on ire although they were also tried
for various offences including four murders with the aid of
section 149 IPC being members of an unlawful assembly. There
are 31 eye witnesses of them 13 were injured to which
reference will be made little later. It is on these
allegations, the trial proceeded before the learned trial
judge against 41 accused persons and on appraisal of oral
and documentary evidence on record the trial court convicted
18 accused persons for various offences of whom four were
for minor offences who did not prefer any appeal against
their convictions and sentences. 14 appellants before us,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9
stood convicted by the impugned order for offences
punishable under sections 302/149/34/147/148,
325/149,323/149 and 436/149 of the Indian Penal Code for
various terms of sentences. All sentences were ordered to
run concurrently. 41 accused persons were also put up for
trial under section 3 of TADA but all were acquitted by the
trial court. The State of Gujarat has filed the appeal
challenging the order of acquittal against original accused
Nos. 15 to 18, 19 to 22, 24 to 28 , 32 33 to 36 and 41. The
Judgment of the Designated Court is dated 12.6.1987.
13. There is no serious challenge before us that Pochabhai,
Prabhubhai, Khodabhai and Mohanbhai met with homicidal
deaths in an incident which took place on 25th January, 1986
at Vankarvas. All the four dead bodies were found on the
road. Dr. Sachdev (P.W.8) performed the autopsy on the dead
body of Pochabhai and the Post-mortem report is at Ex.162.
He noticed as many as 27 external injuries on his person
including five incised wounds. There were also gun shot
injuries and in all 99 pellets were removed from the dead
body. All these injuries were ante mortem and were
sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
Dr. Sachdev testified that Pochabhai died because of shock
and profused bleeding.
(14) Dr. Sachdev held the autopsy on the dead body of
Prabhubhai @ Prabhudas and P.M examination report is at EX.
161. Dr. Sachdev noted 12 external marks of injuries
including three incised wounds, three gun shot entry wounds
and two gun’s to exit wounds. One gun shot wound was over
right anterior lateral aspect in the lower part of the neck.
The middle and lower lobes of right lungs were badely
lacerated. This injury Dr. Sachdev testified that must have
been caused by fire arm from a very close range and that
this injury together with the resultant internal injury was
sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the
death. All these injuries were ante mortem and the injured
died because of shock and extensive bleeding.
(15) Dr. Deven Desai (P.W.15) who performed the post
mortem examination on the dead body of Khodabhai found as
many as 17 external marks of injuries on his person. There
was a stab injury on the back of forearm and an incised
wound on upper lip. There was fracture of lower part of the
third right femur. He sustained a fracture of left scapula
and fracture of left 4th and 5th ribs resulting in
laceration of pleura. Dr. Desai testified that injuries
mentioned in Column No.17 in his report Ex.185 were correct.
He further testified that Khodabhai died because of injuries
caused to the vital parts of the body which were sufficient
in the ordinary course of nature To cause death. All these
injuries were ante mortem.
(16) Dr. Sachdev held the autopsy (Ex.153) on the dead body
of Mohanbhai and noted four external injuries on his person.
There was a contusion in the size of 15 cms. x 5 cms.
extending over posterior angles of 6th to 19th ribs By right
side. The deceased had also sustained a lacerated wound over
lateral aspect, middle part of right thigh. There were
fractures of posterior angles of 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th ribs
on the right hand side. Dr. Desai stated that fractures of
the ribs resulting in big contusion over the right lung,
middle and lower lobs and this fatal injury was sufficient
in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. All these
injuries were ante mortem.
17. After going through the medical evidence of both the
doctors we are satisfied that these four persons died
unnatural deaths because of number of injuries sustained by
them during the incident question. We, therefore, see no
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9
hesitation concluding that Pochabhai, Prabhubhai, Khodabhai
and Mohanbhai met with homicidal deaths.
(18) The prosecution in order to prove the complicity of the
appellants in the present crime examined as many; as 31
witnesses of them had sustained injuries during the
incident in question. We may first deal with the
prosecution evidence relating to the complicity of the three
accused, namely, Chandubhai (A-19), Jamubhai (A-20) and
Nathubhai (A-21). These three accused persons were said to
have been carrying the fire arms (guns) with them. Pochabhi
Kalabhai (P.W.17) in his evidence stated that when Pochabhai
and Prabhubhai (since deceased) were running towards
Vankarvas, A-19, A-20 and A-21 along with the appellants and
other members of the unlawful assembly were chasing both the
deceased fired at them causing bleeding injuries and as a
result thereof both of them fell down. In the meantime the
appellants and other members of the unlawful assembly
assaulted the deceased with spears and other lethal weapons
and thereby caused their instantaneous deaths. Pochabhai
further deposed that Pratap Amarsen (A-22), Amarsen
Takhatasingh (A-24), Dhiru Mvubhai (A-25) Keharsingh (A-26),
Amarsingh Dipsingh (A-27), Ranchor Singh (A-28), Naathu (A-
32), Kalu (A-34) were having sticks and the other accused
were having sharp edged weapons. They all assaulted
Prabhubhai and Pochabhai with sticks and sharp edged weapons
like Dharia and swords. The witness has given minute details
as to how both the deceased were mercilessly assaulted by
the appellants. This witness was searchingly cross examined
on behalf of the defence but we do not find any material to
discredit his evidence. The evidence of pochabhai is
corroborated by host of other eye witness, namely Icchalala
(P.W.18) , Kala Latcha (P.W.19), Prema Punji (P.W.20), Chika
Raghav (P.W. 21),Ghelaganesh (P.W.25), Natahasewa (P.W.23),
Rtna punja (P.E.24), Leela Rewa (P.W.25) and Bhika Ganga
(P.W.26). Their evidence in substance is that A-29, A-20 and
A-21 were chasing both the deceased and fired through their
guns and as a result of fire arm injuries they fell down.
All these witnesses again pointedly referred to the presence
of more than 100 persons from Golana Village belonging to
Rajput, Harijan and other communities. All these appellants
hailed from the same village were personally known to them
and , therefore, there was no difficulty in identifying
them. All these witnesses have given the necessary
particulars about the assault on the deceased persons with
the sticks and other deadly weapons.
(19) Kalaitcha (P.W.19), Bhikaganga (P.W.26), Leelarewa
(P.W.25), Itchalala (P.W.18), Chika Raghav (P.W.21) and
Nathasewa (P.W.23) were the injured eye witnesses. Their
injury certificates area on record. The presence of these
witnesses at the time of incident, therefore, could not be
doubted. Mr. T.U. Mehta, learned Senior Counsel seriously
challenged the evidence of these witnesses, firstly, on the
ground that they are partisan witnesses and have tried to
rope in as many persons as possible as accused from the
Rajput , Harijan and other communities, He further urged
that all these witnesses deposed that the mob of more than
100 persons was chasing the deceased and other injured
Vankars and if this be so mistaken identity of the accused
persons could not be ruled out. to support this submission
he urged that the trial court had acquitted a large number
of accused persons and, therefore, the appellants are also
entitled for acquittal and at any rate they are entitled for
the benefit of doubt for want of proper identification. We
have very carefully gone through he evidence of these eye
witnesses and we find no substance in any of these
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9
contentions. It cannot be ignored that the occurrence in
question took place during day time and in fact the
appellants were chasing the deceased and other injured
persons right from the Golana bus stand till they reached
Vankarvas where two persons were shot down and two were
assaulted with sharp edged and other with lethal weapons.
The witnesses in our opinion had sufficient opportunity to
identify the appellants and they were also known to them.
After careful perusal of oral and documentary evidence on
record we are of the considered view that the prosecution
had successfully established the guilt of the appellants for
which they were tried and convicted by the trial court.
There is enough material on record to show that the
appellants came together with lethal weapons, started giving
slogans and abusing Vankars and also chased them until 4
Vankars fell down on the ground dead and many others were
injured. Since the evidence of these eye witnesses is
identical in all material particulars we do not think it
necessary to reproduce the same. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel
for the appellants inspite of his strenuous efforts was
unable to persuade us to reject the evidence of any of the
witnesses for any sustainable reason. We, therefore, do not
see any error in the judgment and order of conviction passed
by the trial court in respect of A-19,A-20,A-21,A-22,A-24,A-
25,A-26,A-27,A-28,A-32,and A-41. we accordingly uphold the
order of convictions and sentence of these
appellants/accused passed by the trial court.
(20) Coming to the appeal of Kalabhai (A-34),
Kesharbhai (A-35) and Karsanbhai (A-36) who were also
convicted along with the appellants for the offences
punishable under sections 147,148,302/149 of the IPC we are
of the opinion that their case in view of the evidence of
the eye-witnesses, stands on a different footing.
(21) These three accused persons were alleged to have
ransacked and set on fire the houses of Vinodbhai,
Vallabhbhai and Balabhai. The prosecution in this behalf led
the evidence of Nathabhai (P.W.23), Vithalbhai(P.W.41),
Narsinghbhai (P.W.43), Balubhai (P.W.44) and Manibhai
(P.W.47).Vithalbhai (P.W.41) in his evidence has stated that
he was sitting at his house at the time of incident which
took place in the Vankaravas. He saw some persons belonging
to his community were coming towards Vankarvas from the side
of bus stand. A mob consisting of 100-150 persons of Rajput,
Harijan and other communities was chasing Vankars. He
further stated that he identified A-34, A-35 and A-36 as
they belonged to the same village. When he saw them coming
to his house he closed the shutters of his door and stayed
inside the house. These accused persons and other members of
the riotous mob went towards the house of Vinodbhai. They
were raising slogans "burn dhedwada." when he came out of
his house he saw A-34, A-35, and A-36 were setting the house
of Vinobhai on fire. At that time no other member of the
riotous mob was present at that place. He, however admitted
that he did not see A-34, A-35 and A-36 had set on fire the
houses of Vallabhbhai and Balabhai. The houses of Vallabhai
and Vinodbhai were adjacent to the house of Vinodbhai and it
appears that they also caught fire. This witness was again
searchingly cross examined by the defence but no material
could be brought out on record to discredit his evidence.
The evidence of this witness finds corroboration from the
evidence of Nothibhai (P.W.23), Narsinghbhai (P.W.43),
Balubhai (P.W.44), and Naniben (P.W.47). All these witnesses
have consistently stated that A-34, A-35 and A-36 had seton
fire the house of Vinodbhai. All these witnesses further
stated that when these three accused were setting the house
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9
of Vinodbhai on fire they heard the sound of gunshot coming
from the nearby place. It was not the claim of any of these
witnesses that either of these three accused persons had
used the fire arm and/or caused assault on the deceased
persons.
(22) it is no doubt true that these eye witnesses had
deposed that A-34, A-35 and A-36 were members of the
unlawful assembly/riotous mob which was chasing the deceased
and the other injured persons of the Vankar community from
the bus stand until they reached Vankarvas but when the mob
came near the house of Vinodbhai and thereafter set his
house on fire and other members of the riotous mob continued
to chase Vankars and thereafter they heard the firing
sounds coming from that direction. The question that needs
to be answered on these proved facts is as to whether A-34,
A-35 and A-36 could be said to have shared the common object
of committing murders with A-19, A-20 and A-21 who fired
from their fire arms killing Prabhudas and Pochabhai as also
other appellants who caused an assault on Khodabhai and
Mohanbhai with the deadly weapons as a result of which they
also died on the spot. On the evidence on record, we find,
it cannot be said to be conclusively established that A-34,
A-35 and A-36 also shared the common object to commit the
above murders of four persons. The time factor in this
behalf assumes great importance because when A-34, A-35 and
A-36 were engaged in setting the house of Vinodbhai on fire
the other appellants committed the murders of four persons
by using fire arms and other deadly weapons. The trial court
convicted A-34, A-35 and A-36 for committing the murders of
Prabhubhai, Pochabhai, Khodabhai and Mohanbhai with the aid
of both Sections 149/34 IPC. On the proved facts we are,
however, unable to affirm the conviction of A-34, A-35 and
A-36 for the above murders either with the aid of Section
149 or section 34 IPC but their conviction and sentence
under Section 436/34 IPC must stand confirmed. It is no
Doubt true that these three accused persons while chasing
Vankars caused injuries to various persons of the Vankar
community for which they have been rightly convicted and
sentenced by the trial court under sections 324/149 and
325/149 IPC. The appellants being the members of an unlawful
assembly committed the offence of rioting and have been
rightly convicted under sections 147 and 148 of the IPC. In
view of our final analysis of the material on record we are
of the considered view that the conviction and sentence of
A-34, A-35 and A-36 cannot be sustained under section
302/149 of the IPC and consequently it is set aside, however
their conviction and sentence for the other offences are
confirmed.
(23) As regards Criminal Appeal No. 354 of 1987 filed by the
State Challenging the order of acquittal passed by the trial
court in respect of 18 accused persons, we are of the
considered opinion that the view taken by the trial court in
acquitting them does not suffer from any infirmity and they
have been rightly acquitted by the trial court.
(24) For the aforesaid conclusions the convictions and
sentences of Chandubhai Malubhai Parmar (A-19), Jamubhai
Gordhanbhai Dodiya (A-20), Nathubhai Pratpsingh alias
prabhatbhai Parmar (A-21), Pratapsang Amarsang Parmar (A-
22), Amarsang Takhubhai alias Takhatsingh Parmar (A-24),
Dhirubhai Mavubhai Parmar(A-25), Bahadurbhai alias Keharsing
Nathubhai Parmar (A-26), Amarsang Dipsang alias Dipubhai
Paramar (A-27) and Ranchodbhai Rambhai Parmer (A-28),
Nathubhai Rambhai Parmer (A-32) and Ganubhai alias Abhesing
Mavubhai Parmar (A-41) awarded by the trial court on various
counts are sustained and their appeal to stand dismissed.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9
The conviction and sentence of A-34, A-35 and A-36 under
sections 302/149 or 34 of the IPC is quashed and set aside
and they are acquitted of this charge, however their
conviction and sentence under section 436/34 IPc is uphold.
The convictions and sentences passed by the trial court
against A-34, A-35 and A-36 on other counts are confirmed.
(25) The appellants who are on bail shall surrender to
their bail bonds to serve out the remaining part of their
respective sentences. Criminal Appeal No. 95/88 is partly
allowed as indicated above. Criminal Appeal No. 354/87 to
stand dismissed.