PROJECT REPORT

Charandas Swami
Vs
State of Gujarat

AIR 2017 SC

SUBMITTED TO- SUBMITTED BY-

DR. PUSHPINDER KAUR ISHAN SHARMA

(University Institute of Legal Studies) ROLL NO.13727 238/15
B.COM LL.B (HONS.)
SECTION-D

6th SEMESTER

University Institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher Dr. Pushpinder Kaur who
gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on the topic “Charandas Swami v.
State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC ” which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to
know about so many new things.

Secondly I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in finishing this
project within the limited time.

Ishan Sharma

2|Page
 DETAILS OF THE CASE

 NAME OF THE CASE.

 Charandas Swami

VS.

State of Gujarat

 CITATION OF THE CASE.

 AIR 2017 SC.

 PRESIDING JUDGES OF THE CASE.

1. Honorable Justice Kurian Joseph

2. Honorable Justice A.M. Khanwilkar

 DATE OF JUDGMENT.

 MATTERS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE.

1. Code of Criminal Procedure (Act, 5 of 1898) Sections- 88, 307, 410, 417, 418 (1),
423(2), 297,155(1), 162.
2. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860) Sections- 302, 364, 120B, 201
3. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872).

3|Page
FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The Board of Trustees of the Swami Narayan sect of Vadtal Gadi Temple comprises of 8
members, including the Chairman and Chief Kothari, who handle the administration and
financial management of the temples run by the sect.

2. One Gadadharanandji was elected as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees on 11th April
1998. At that point in time, one Bhakti Dasji was the Chief Kothari and Narayan Shastri was the
Assistant Kothari. Charandas Swami was informally working as an assistant to Narayan shastri,
while Madhav Prasad, Ghanshyam and Vijay Bhagat were henchmen of Narayan Shastri.

3. On 16th April, 1998, an agenda was circulated for a meeting of the Board of Trustees to be
held on 22nd April, 1998, wherein the Chairman, Gadadharanandji, proposed to transfer the
Kotharis away from the Vadtal Temple. That move was not approved by the rival camp. They
also feared of being exposed of their misdeeds and maladministration.

4. On 3rd May, 1998, Gadadharanandji went missing from the temple premises. The next day i.e.
4th May, 1998, a burnt body was found in a ditch at Barothi Village, in the neighbouring State of
Rajasthan which was subsequently identified as that of Gadadharanandji. A post mortem of the
body revealed that the cause of death was asphyxia by strangulation.

5. Meanwhile, one of the deceased’s disciples, Jatin Bhagat filed a missing person complaint
about the sudden disappearance of Gadadharanandji with the local police on 5th May, 1998. This
complaint was transferred to the local crime branch and then the state crime branch. Jatin Bhagat
subsequently filed a petition before the High Court of Gujarat, which transferred the
investigation of the case to the CBI on 5th October 1998.

4|Page
6. The CBI eventually on 29th October, 1998 registered a new FIR against some persons,
including the Appellants, for kidnapping Gadadharanandji. During the course of investigation, all
the five accused were arrested in connection with the disappearance of Gadadharanandji.

7. The investigation established the chain of events leading to the disappearance of

Gadadharanandji. According to the prosecution, the accused kidnapped Gadadharanandji from
the Vadtal Temple complex, took him in a blue car/van to the Navli Temple complex where they
procured a call girl for him, after which they sedated and then strangled him. However, this chain
of events was at odds with the panchnama drawn at the behest of Accused No. 3 wherein he is
stated to have confessed that he himself kidnapped Gadadharanandji from the temple, drove him
to his (Accused No. 3) house in Vadtal and then strangled him there using the deceased’s
‘khesiya’ (cloth usually placed around the neck). Accused No.3 also claimed that he returned
with the deceased’s body in his car to Vadtal, informed Accused No.1 about the deed and then
took Accused No.5 along with him to Rajasthan where they disposed of the dead body of
deceased by throwing it in a ditch and lighting it on fire.

8. Post-investigation, the Chief Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 10th August, 1999
remitted the case against all the five accused. The trial proceeded before the District and Sessions
Court at Kheda at Hadiat, being Sessions Case No. 369 of 1999. Various charges including those
under u/S. 120-B, 364, 302 and 201 of the IPC were framed against the Accused.

9. On 11th June, 2004, the Sessions Court, Nadiad convicted all the five accused for offence
under Section 302 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced them to death. The Accused were also
convicted u/S. 364 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life.
Accused Nos. 2 and 5 were further convicted under S. 201 r/w S. 120-B and sentenced to 5
years’ imprisonment.

10. The accused preferred an appeal to the High Court of Gujarat which was heard alongwith the
confirmation reference. The High Court confirmed the conviction against Accused Nos.1, 2, 3
and 5, but acquitted Accused No.4. The High Court, however, commuted the death sentence to a
sentence of life imprisonment.

5|Page
 CHARGES FRAMED:

Under Post-investigation, the Chief Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 10th August, 1999
remitted the case against all the five accused. The trial proceeded before the District and Sessions
Court at Kheda at Hadiat, being Sessions Case No. 369 of 1999. Various charges including those
under section, 120-B, 364, 302 and 201 of the IPC were framed against the Accused. On 11th
June, 2004, the Sessions Court, Nadiad convicted all the five accused for offence under Section
302 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced them to death. The Accused were also convicted under
section 364 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life. Accused Nos.
2 and 5 were further convicted under S. 201 r/w S. 120-B and sentenced to 5 years’
imprisonment.
The accused preferred an appeal to the High Court of Gujarat which was heard alongwith the
confirmation reference. The High Court confirmed the conviction against Accused Nos.1, 2, 3
and 5, but acquitted Accused No.4. The High Court, however, commuted the death sentence to a
sentence of life imprisonment. Further the Accused no.1 ,2 and 5 filed an appeal to supreme
court.

PROCEEDINGS AT SUPREME COURT

ARGUMENTS BY PROSECUTION :

1. The arguments were opened by the counsel for Accused No.2, followed by Accused No.1
and Accused No.5. Mr KTS Tulsi, learned senior counsel appearing for Accused No.1,
submitted that there is no evidence to show either meeting of minds by the accused or
intention to commit criminal conspiracy. The prosecutions case that the accused were irked
by the deceaseds proposal to transfer them is imaginary because admittedly, the actual
decision for transfer could be taken only by the entire Board, comprising of 7 (seven) other
members. Eliminating a single person i.e. the deceased, would not have helped the accused in

6|Page
 any way. This is further substantiated by the fact that Accused Nos. 4 and 5 were not even
Kotharis and eliminating the deceased would have served no purpose to them. Further he said
there was no evidence to prove that the deceased even proposed the transfer of the accused.
The prosecution has failed to consider the possible involvement of one
Navatam/Nautam/Nutan Swami and Premswarup Swami who were inimical towards the
deceased. These two persons were named in the FIR but their names were dropped in the
eventual chargesheet filed by CBI. The impugned judgment also records that
Navatam/Nautam/Nutan Swami failed a lie detector test. The real perpetrators were removed
from the chargesheet but the innocent accused was charged. The alleged motive attributed to
the accused is unfounded and unsubstantiated.

2. Mr. Tulsi further submits that certain witnesses, who inter alia claimed to have last seen the
deceased leaving the temple with some of the accused on the day of the alleged incident, have
turned hostile and their evidence has to be disregarded.

3.He further added the doctor who conducted the autopsy of the burnt body, failed to establish
that the cause of death was by strangulation and further failed to clarify whether the burns on the
body were inflicted pre-mortem or post-mortem.

4. Mr. Tulsi submits that the courts below ignored the well-established principle that in a case of
circumstantial evidence, each and every circumstance has to be proved by independent, cogent
evidence and each circumstance must be connected to each other as to complete the chain
ofcircumstances.

5. Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Counsel, appeared for the Accused
No.2. He had opened th arguments for the appellants and raised points some
of which have already been noted earlier. He submitted that the complete
chain of events has not been established by the prosecution. According to
him, the deceased’s proposal to transfer the Kotharis was dropped by the
deceased himself. Reliance has been placed in this regard on the application
made by a person to the High Court of Gujarat, wherein it is stated that the
deceased deferred his decision to effectuate the transfers by 6 (six) months.
Infact, Navatam/Nautam/Nutan Swami and Premswarup Swami held a grudge
against the deceased owing to the deferment as they wished to become the
7|Page
Kotharis in place of the incumbents. Their names were removed from the
chargesheet without any explanation offered by the investigating agency.
Additionally, the Sessions Court in its judgment has held that evidence could
not be considered for the purpose of establishing motive as he did not have
any personal knowledge of the transfer of the Kotharis. Thus, no intent or
motive of the accused to commit the crime was proved.
6. With regard to the allegation that the accused were misappropriating
temple funds, Mr. Ahmadi submits that while the prosecution relied on
money seized from the houses of the accused, however, no documentary
evidence has been adduced to show that Accused No.2 had assets
disproportionate to his income.
7. Mr. Ahmadi then submits that as regards the disappearance of the
deceased from the Vadtal
Temple premises, the two witnesses who claimed that they saw the deceased
leaving with the
accused, had turned hostile.
8. Mr. Ahmadi finally submits that Accused No.2 has no links with the criminal
conspiracy to
murder the deceased. The panchnama prepared at the instance of Accused
No. 3 does not even
mention the role or involvement of Accused No.2. The panchnama prepared
at the instance of
Accused No.5 deserved to be disregarded owing to contradictory statements
therein. The Sessions Court has recorded that Accused No.2 did not even
hold an official post at the temple. Further, Accused No.2 was arrested
without there being any sufficient proof against him and the prosecution
went to the extent of fabricating documents to implicate him, as recorded in
the impugned judgment.
9. Mr. D.N. Ray, appeared for Accused No.5. He submits that the impugned
Judgment is perverse as some of the primary findings recorded therein are
diametrically opposite to the case set out by the prosecution and the findings
recorded by the Sessions Court. Mr. Ray submits that the time of death of the
8|Page
deceased, as set out by the prosecution and as accepted by the Sessions
Court, was between 3 PM to 4:30 PM whereas the High Court has assumed
the time of death to be between 5 PM to 7 PM. This discrepancy arises out of
the prosecutions failure to establish the time of death of the deceased.
10. Mr. Ray then submits that the prosecutions case, as accepted by the trial
Court, is that the
deceased was administered sleeping pills to render him unconscious after
which Accused Nos. 3 to 5 strangulated him while Accused No.2 was
guarding the room from outside. The High Court,
however, has recorded that the prosecution fabricated evidence and planted
the sleeping pills. More importantly, the High Court has changed the
narrative of the prosecution and recorded that the deceased was smothered
by a pillow, not strangulated. No basis for such change in narrative is
forthcoming.
11. Mr. Ray also submits that the innocence of Accused No.5 can be inferred
from the fact that no charges were levelled against him at the initial stages.
Even the FIR filed by the CBI did not contain his name. Accused No.5 was far
removed from the main accused and was a stranger to the criminal
conspiracy alleged by the prosecution.
ARGUMENTS BY DEFENDANTS :
1. In reply, Ms. Kiran Suri, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the prosecution, first submits
that the accused had conspired with each other to murder the deceased and that their conviction
by the lower Courts is based on the evidence available on record. Ms. Suri also submits that the
chain of circumstances proving the guilt of the accused has been established and proved through
the various
witnesses.
2. With regard to the guilt of the accused in appeal, Ms. Suri submits that there cannot be direct
evidence of hatching a criminal conspiracy and the same has to be reasonably inferred from the
evidence. In the present case, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused on the basis of
motive, last-seen theory, place of murder and disposal of body, panchnama at the instance of
Accused No.5, recovery of the body of the deceased and conduct of Accused No.3.
3. Ms. Suri submits that it is indisputable that Accused No.1 was the Assistant Kothari of the
9|Page
temple and Accused No.2 was assisting him. From the circumstantial evidence and considering
the unaccounted money found at their house/in their bank accounts, it is apparent that Accused
Nos.1 and 2 were involved in financial irregularities of the temple funds and that their
continuation at Vadtal was threatened by the deceaseds proposal to transfer the Kotharis out of
the Vadtal Temple. Thus, there was clear apprehension in the minds of Accused Nos. 1 and 2 that
they would be replaced.
4. Ms. Suri then submits that panchnama drawn at the instance of Accused No.3 and the
statement given to the police was an attempt to mislead the prosecution from the real events that
unfolded. The panchnama sets out the real incident wherein the deceased was murdered at Navli
and not at Vadtal as claimed by Accused No.3. Accused No.3 possessed the car/van which was
subsequently found in a burnt state in the garage A false insurance claim was lodged regarding
the accident to the car, which was rejected.
5. Ms. Suri finally submits that the prosecution has clearly proved the recovery of the deceaseds
body and its identification. PW50 has deposed that he found the burnt body in a ditch at Barothi
Village, Rajasthan. It has been proved that the said body was of the deceased through DNA
testing and by the presence of gold caps on the teeth of the body. This has been corroborated by
PW1, the doctor who put the caps on the teeth of the accused. Thus, the chain of events is
complete in the present case so as to leave no manner of doubt regarding the guilt of the accused.
She submits that this Court should be loath to interfere with the concurrent findings of guilt
recorded by the two Courts against the appellants herein.

10 | P a g e
 JUDGMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT

On analyzing the evidence and the judgments including the findings and conclusion
recorded by both the Courts, Court had no hesitation in upholding the order of conviction against
Accused Nos.1, 2 and 5 (appellants herein). For, the presence of Gadadharanandji at Vadtal
Temple complex on the day of incident, the evidence that he was last seen together with Accused
No.3 going from Vadtal Temple complex in a car, the recovery of a dead body in village Barothi
in the neighboring state of Rajasthan on the next day of disappearance of Gadadharanandji, the
disclosure made by Accused No.3 about the location as to where the dead body of
Gadadharanandji was dumped by him in a village at Barothi, the discovery of the fact after
subsequent medical examination that the dead body so recovered was of none other than that of
Gadadharanandji, the disclosure made by Accused No.5 of the location where Gadadharanandji
was strangled at Navli Temple complex, the conduct of Accused No.3 in misleading the
investigating agencies, the burning of the vehicle used in the commission of the crime and then
filing of a false insurance claim which was rejected by the insurance company, the strong motive
for committing the murder of Gadadharanandji and the criminal conspiracy hatched in that
behalf and executed, left no manner of doubt about the involvement of the appellants in the
commission of the crime. Therefore they fully agreed with the opinion recorded by the Courts
below in that regard. They said it is not a case of finding of guilt recorded in absence of any legal
evidence or contrary to the evidence available on record. They found that the finding of guilt
against the appellants was inescapable. Hence, they saw no tangible reason to interfere with the
final conclusion so reached by both the Courts..

Accordingly, Court dismissed all the three appeals filed by the original Accused Nos.1, 2 and 5
respectively and upheld the order of conviction and sentence passed by the High Court, which is
impugned in these three appeals. They said Accused on bail shall surrender forthwith.

11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
 CRITICAL APPRAISAL

13 | P a g e
 LATEST CASE LAWS

ASHOK KUMAR @JHABRU

VS.

STATE

(CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 305 SC 2nd April, 2018)

FACTS OF THE CASE:

There had been a quarrel between the accused and the deceased over the money that had
to be paid by the accused for the goods taken by him from the shop of the deceased and due to
the said enmity Ashok Kumar the accused uttered some words. The Appellant at around 12.45
pm on 28th September 1997, near Service Road, Bapu Dham Telephone Depot, Jhuggi, Indira
Camp, the Appellant murdered the deceased Om Prakash by stabbing him with a knife and
thereby committing the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. The deceased was stabbed
by the accused thrice - once on the left chest and the other two times on the arms. Accused was
in a drunken state at the time of commission of the offence. The cause of death was shock and
haemorrhage as a result of the injury to the internal organs. It was clear, therefore, that the stab
wound on the chest was so deep and severe that it pierced the liver.

DECISION:

With the medical evidence fully corroborating the ocular evidence as far as the number
of injuries and the place of injuries on the body of the deceased, the Court has no difficulty in
concurring with the trial Court that the ocular evidence in the present case conclusively proves
beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the Appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC.

The key ingredient of the offence punishable under Section 304-I IPC is grave and sudden
provocation arising out of a sudden quarrel on the spur of moment without premeditation. In the
present case, the motive for the offence traced back to an incident which was 5-6 months earlier
from the date of the occurrence. The manner in which the occurrence took place, as described by
14 | P a g e
the eye witnesses, leaves no room for doubt that it was a premeditated offence. There is no
occasion, therefore, for the Court to consider converting the conviction for the offence of murder
punishable under Section 302 IPC to the offence of culpable homicide punishable under Section
304-I IPC.

EGGYA
VS.
STATE REPRESENTED BY
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KALLAKURICHI POLICE STATION,
VILLUPURAM.

(CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 295 SC 3rd February, 2016)

 FACTS OF THE CASE:

The deceased in this case was one Mr.Ramadoss. He was a resident of Karunapuram
Colony in Kallakurichi. The accused also belongs to the same Village. The deceased had
borrowed a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the accused. But the deceased did not repay the same. The
accused demanded to repay, but the deceased was evading. On 09.06.2008 at 12.30 p.m., the
accused demanded the deceased to repay the loan amount forthwith. This resulted in a quarrel
between the accused and the deceased. During the course of quarrel, it is stated that the accused
took out a knife and stabbed the deceased on his abdomen. The deceased fell down in a pool of
blood. The brother of the accused took the deceased immediately to the Government Hospital at
Kallakurichi. But, at 01.00 p.m., on examining the deceased, the Doctor declared him as dead.

 CHARGES FRAMED: Based on the above materials, the trial Court framed the charges
against the accused under Section 302 IPC r/w Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

 DECISION:
The meeting of the accused and the deceased was by chance. Thus the occurrence was not a
premeditated one. On seeing the deceased, the accused only demanded the loan amount. This
resulted in a wordy quarrel between the two. Though the prosecution has not placed the details of
15 | P a g e
the actual conversation between the accused and the deceased, going by the natural human
conduct, more particularly the fact that it was not a premeditated occurrence, we presume that
either by words or by act, the deceased would have provoked the accused. Further, had it been
the intention of the accused to cause the death of the deceased, he would have attacked him by
all means, to ensure death of the deceased instantaneously. But, he did not repeat the attack.
Cumulatively, all these facts would go to show that the accused had no intention to cause the
death, but he had intention only to cause injury on the deceased, which was sufficient in the
ordinary course of nature, to cause his death. Thus, the act of the accused would squarely fall
within the third limb of Section 300 I.P.C. But, at the same time, since the accused had lost his
mental balance, due to grave and sudden provocation caused by the deceased, his act would
squarely fall within the first limb of Section 300 IPC. Thus, the act of the accused would not
amount to murder and it would only amount to culpable homicide punishable under Section
304(i) I.P.C.

16 | P a g e
 RELEVANT STATISTICS- NCRB REPORT.

NUMBER OF CULABLE HOMICIDES AMOUNTING TO

MURDER FROM 2012-2016

1800

1600

1400

1200 PUNJAB
HARYANA
1000
CHANDIGARH
800 RAJASTHAN
HIMACHAL PRADESH
600

400

200

0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

STATE WISE COMPARISON

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

PUNJAB 855 711 767 701 771
HARYANA 991 982 1106 1002 1057
CHANDIGARH 21 22 24 20 26
RAJASTHAN 1461 1573 1637 1569 1551
HIMACHAL 113 104 130 106 101
PRADESH

17 | P a g e
Culpable Homicide Amounting to Murder in India:

Total number culpable homicides amounting to murder in the year 2016 were 30450
whereas in the year 2015 the number of culpable homicides was 32127. There has been
considerable decrease in the number of culpable homicides in the past one year.

Crime rate of Murder in India was 2.4 during 2016. The top 10 States/UTs in terms of
having highest Crime rate for Murder during 2016 were namely; Jharkhand, Meghalaya,
Haryana, Tripura, Chhattisgarh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Odisha, Manipur and Telangana.

Crime rate of Murder was 4.5 in Jharkhand during 2016. There were 1514 incidents and
1517 victims of Murder had been reported during 2016 in Jharkhand. Crime rate of Murder was
3.9 in Meghalaya during 2016. There were 108 incidents and 110 victims of Murder had been
reported during 2016 in Meghalaya. Crime rate of Murder was 3.8 in Haryana during 2016.
There were 1057 incidents and 1090 victims of Murder had been reported during 2016 in
Haryana

18 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. The Indian Penal Code, 1860- Prof. T. Bhattacharya, 6th Ed., Central Law Agency, First ed.-
Reprint 2010.

2. PSA Pillai’s Criminal Law- Kl Vibhute,12th Ed.,Lexis Nexis Publication,2014.

3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860- S.N. Mishra,17th Ed., Central Law Publication Company, 2012

WEBLIOGRAPHY

 https://indiankanoon.org
 https://lawnn.com/k-m-nanavati-v-state-maharashtra/
 https://lawschoolnotes.wordpress.com/2016/09/06/k-m-nanavati-vs-state-of-maharashtra-
1962-air-sc-605/
 https://www.vakilno1.com/supreme-court/10-latest-supreme-court-judgments-criminal-
law-january-2015.html
 http://ncrb.gov.in/

 http://www.manupatra.com/roundup/233/judgments.html

 http://www.judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=3641

19 | P a g e