JUDGMENT : A.P. THAKER, J. The appellant-accused has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Ahmedabad City (hereinafter be referred to as "the trial Court"), in Sessions Case No. 353 of 2012, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the appellant-accused guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of life for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. 2. The appellant-accused has preferred the present criminal appeal under Sec. 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 inter alia contending that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and has committed serious error of law and facts in convicting him for the alleged offence. It is contended by the appellant that the complainant who has lodged the complaint is not eye-witness and on that basis, hearsay facts, he has lodged the complaint. It is also contended that the evidence of Mumtazbegam Sulemankhan Pathan, P.W. 9 and Shabinaben Sharifkhan Pathan, P.W. 12 as well as deposition of the Medical Officer does not inspire any confidence and there are contradictions in the evidence. It is also contended by the appellant that the reasoning given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is contrary to law and oral as well as documentary evidence on record, and therefore, the impugned judgment and order of conviction deserves to be quashed and set aside. Therefore, he has prayed to allow the appeal. 3. The brief facts of the present case as emerged from the record are that the complainant Sarver Hussain Ikbal Hussain Shaikh had married with Shabina and out of their wedlock, a girl child was born and due to internal problem Shabina left the house of the complainant, and thereafter, Shabina along with her daughter namely Shabnam @ Kaynat was residing with the present appellant-accused. It is also the case of the prosecution that the accused was disliked that Shabina was living along with her daughter Shabnam with him and for that reason, there were frequent quarrel between the appellant and Shabina and on fateful day i.e. on 22-5-2012, the appellant has inflicted kick and fist blows to the girl child and thrown her on surface and due to which she sustained internal and external injury. It is alleged that when the complainant came to know this fact, he rushed to the house of the accused and found that there was injury mark on the face of Shabnam, and therefore, he informed the police control room, and thereafter, she was shifted to the civil hospital where she was declared as dead. It is also alleged that the post-mortem of the deceased girl child was carried out and on that basis, the complainant has lodged the complaint before Isanpur Police Station which was registered as C.R. No. I-129/2012 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 23-5-2012. Before that, Entry No. 29 of 2012 as to accidental death was made before the police and during the investigation of that accidental death entry, it was found that Shabnam was died due to internal and external injury, and therefore, the complaint came to be lodged on that basis and the offence was registered against the present accused. 4. On the basis of the F.I.R., necessary investigation was carried out by the Investigating Officer and the appellant was arrested on 24-5-2012 and after completion of investigation, the police has filed the charge-sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.1, Ahmedabad. As the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has committed the case under Sec. 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad wherein it has been registered as Sessions Case No. 353 of 2012. 5. The charge against the accused came to be framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 5-2-2013 vide Exh. 1 for the aforesaid offence. On being explained it to him, the accused has denied having committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial, and hence, the case was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad. 1 for the aforesaid offence. On being explained it to him, the accused has denied having committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial, and hence, the case was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad. 6. It appears from the records that to prove the case, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses : P.W. 1 Maheshbhai Babubhai Desai Panch witness of discovery panchnama Exh. 7 P.W. 2 Gulamnabi Khadinbhai Ansari Panch witness of scene of offence Exh.10 P.W. 3 Merajbhai Momammad Siddiq Ansari Panch witness of scene of offence Exh.12 P.W. 4 Shakhavatali Nisharali Saiyed Panch witness of blood sample of accused Exh.13 P.W. 5 Dr. Maheshkumar Pursottambhai Kapadia Civil Surgeon Exh.16 P.W. 6 Sharvarhussain Ikbalhussain Shaikh Panch witness of panchnama where dead body was lying Exh.25 P.W. 7 Faridkhan Valimahammad Pathan Panch witness of panchnama where dead body was lying Exh.27 P.W. 8 Ashifbhai Jalilbabu Shaikh Panch witness of inquest panchnama Exh.28 P.W. 9 Mumtajbegam Sualekhan Pathan Eye-witness Exh.30 P.W.10 Nasimbanu Ikbal Shaikh Sister of complainant Exh.31 P.W.11 Reshmabanu Jakirhussain Shaikh Neighbour Exh.33 P.W.12 Shabinaben Sharifkhan Pathan Mother of deceased Exh.34 P.W.13 Sharvarhussain Tahirhussain Shaikh Complainant Exh.35 P.W.14 Amrutbhai Jivabhai Bhagora Investigating Officer Exh.37 P.W.15 Vishnubhai Babubhai Patel Police Officer Exh.44 7. In addition to this, the prosecution has also produced the following documentary evidence : Sr. No. Particular Exh. 1. Panchnama of the clothes worn by the accused at the time of incident. 8 2. Panch slip (joint) 9 3. Panchnuma of scene of offence 11 4. Panchnama of blood sample of the accused 14 5. Police yadi 17 6. Police report of investigation of the deceased 18 7. Post-mortem report 19 8. Letter for viscera written by the police to the F.S.L. 20 9. Death certificate of Kaynat 21 10. Letter written by the Doctor to Isanpur Police Station regarding bodily injury sustained by deceased 22 11. Panchnama of dead-body which was kept at the place of incident 26 12. Inquest Panchnama 29 13. Letter and certificate of the central jail regarding treatment of the accused. 32 14. Original complaint 36 15. Panchnama of sample and clothes discovered during post-mortem of the deceased. 38 16. Panchnama of the place where deceased died 39 17. Report of charge 40 18. Special report 41 19. Inquest Panchnama 29 13. Letter and certificate of the central jail regarding treatment of the accused. 32 14. Original complaint 36 15. Panchnama of sample and clothes discovered during post-mortem of the deceased. 38 16. Panchnama of the place where deceased died 39 17. Report of charge 40 18. Special report 41 19. Letter for calling F.S.L. Office at the place of scene of offence and opinion 42 20. Forwarding note for sending muddamal to the F.S.L. 45 21. F.S.L. receipt 46 22. Letter of F.S.L. 47 23. Letter and report of the F.S.L. 48 24. Covering letter of the F.S.L. 49 25. Report of Biology Division of the F.S.L. 50 26. Report of Serology Division of the F.S.L. 51 8. At the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused under Sec. 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and after hearing the arguments on both the sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the appellant-accused guilty for the above offence charged against him and awarded sentence as narrated hereinabove. 9. Mr. P.V. Patadiya, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-accused has vehemently submitted that the learned trial Court has committed serious error of law and facts in convicting the accused. While referring to the oral evidence as well as medical evidence on record, Mr. Patadiya, learned Advocate has stated that the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be said to be committed by the accused. Of course, he has conceded that there is no denial of the fact that the accused was present at the time of incident and he has beaten the deceased. According to him, there was no intention on the part of the accused to kill the deceased and there is no mens rea to commit the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. According to him, the conviction of the appellant under Sec. 302 is required to be converted to one under Sec. 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. Patadiya has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Govindbhai Vagabhai Chavda v. State of Gujarat, dated 27-9-2013 rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 3047 of 2008 for proposition that there is no intention on the part of the accused to kill the deceased. Mr. Patadiya has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Govindbhai Vagabhai Chavda v. State of Gujarat, dated 27-9-2013 rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 3047 of 2008 for proposition that there is no intention on the part of the accused to kill the deceased. While referring to the said judgment in the case of Govindbhai Vagabhai Chavda (supra), he has contended that in the said case, the accused had beaten his son with stick and due to that he was dead and in the said case, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the conviction has been converted to Sec. 304, Part-I of the Indian Penal Code, and accordingly, in the present case also the same view may be taken and the accused may be given similar benefit. 10. Per contra, Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State has vehemently submitted that the entire case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the eye-witness and the medical evidence and there is clear and cogent evidence on record that due to internal injury caused to the deceased, the deceased has died and there was frequent quarrel between the accused and mother of the deceased and as the accused was disliked to keep with her mother, he has committed the said offence. Mr. Trivedi, learned A.P.P. has submitted that there is no reason to set aside the impugned judgment and order of conviction and he has prayed to dismiss the appeal and confirm the impugned judgment and order rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 11. We have heard Mr. P.V. Patadiya learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. We have perused the entire evidence on the record. 12. The prosecution has heavily relied on the evidence of the eye-witness Shabinaben Sharifkhan Pathan, P.W. 12 at Exh. 34. On perusal of her evidence, it transpires that she has stated that the deceased Shabnam was her daughter, who was born through wedlock of her earlier husband. She has stated that at the time of incident, she was living with Sharifkhan i.e. present accused and her daughter was also with them. She has stated that at the time of incident, the age of Shabnam was 4 years. She has stated that at the time of incident, she was living with Sharifkhan i.e. present accused and her daughter was also with them. She has stated that at the time of incident, the age of Shabnam was 4 years. She has also narrated the fact that her daughter was playing and at that time, the accused has beaten her on stomach and she tried to stop Sharifkhan, but he did not stop. According to her, Shabnam was brought to the hospital, where the doctor has declared her dead. It is contended by her that the doctor has told her to perform post-mortem but the accused has denied to do so, and therefore, her daughter was brought back at home, and thereafter, earlier husband Sharvarhussain came to her house, and thereafter, her earlier husband has lodged the complaint. She has contended that Sharifkhan was frequently beating her daughter Shabnam. During her cross-examination, she has adhered the version of her chief-examination. Of course, she has stated that there was no blood on the body of the deceased at the time of occurrence of the incident. 13. P.W. 13-Sharvarhussain Tahirhussain Shaikh at Exh. 35, who is earlier husband of Shabina, has categorically stated the same facts regarding his marriage with Shabina and Shabina having been living with the present accused with her daughter. He has also stated that he has got the information that his daughter Shabnam died and he along with other persons went to the house of Shabina and they found that Shabnam was died and that he has also seen that there was injury mark on the face of the deceased, and thereafter, he called the police and the post-mortem of the deceased was carried out and as deceased died due to the injury caused by the accused, he lodged the complaint before the police. This witness has thoroughly been cross-examined by the defence side. Of course, he has stated that he has got information from sister-in-law of Shabina who has telephonically told her sister. Of course, he has admitted that he himself has not seen the entire incident. 14. On perusal of the evidence of panch witness Maheshbhai Babubhai Desai, P.W. 1 at Exh. 7, it appears that he is the panch of the recovery panchnama whereby various articles thereof were seized. 15. On perusal of the evidence of P.W. 2-Gulamnabi Khadinbhai Ansari at Exh. 14. On perusal of the evidence of panch witness Maheshbhai Babubhai Desai, P.W. 1 at Exh. 7, it appears that he is the panch of the recovery panchnama whereby various articles thereof were seized. 15. On perusal of the evidence of P.W. 2-Gulamnabi Khadinbhai Ansari at Exh. 10 and P.W. 3-Merajbhai Mohammadsiddiq Ansari at Exh. 12, it is found that they both have denied the facts of preparing panchnama before them. Therefore, they have been declared hostile by the prosecution. 16. It reveals from the evidence of P.W. 4-Shakhavatali Nisharali Saiyed at Exh. 13 that he is panch witness, in whose presence, the blood sample of Sharifkhan has been taken. 17. On perusal of the evidence of P.W. 5-Dr. Maheshkumar Pursottambhai Kapadia at Exh. 16, it reveals that he has carried out the post-mortem of the deceased. During his examination, he has narrated that there were various external injuries on the dead body of the deceased and he has also found various internal injury on the dead body of the deceased and all the injuries were prior to the death and those injuries were capable to cause death in natural course. He has stated that he has found the following injuries on the dead body of the deceased. 17. Injuries and abrasions on the external parts of the body, their type and condition and their size and direction be specifically mentioned and the age of injury as well as its possible cause be mentioned: 17. Injuries and abrasions on the external parts of the body, their type and condition and their size and direction be specifically mentioned and the age of injury as well as its possible cause be mentioned: In Case of appearance of greenish abrasions or in case of rotating, the condition of the veins and muscles under the skin : Note : When there are more than one injuries and it is not possible to mention them within the space provided. (1) Contusion 1 x 1 cm. over left cheek rounded, 3 cm. inferolateral to left eye with redness with abrasions. (2) 0.3 x 0.3 cm. abrasion 1 cm. below lateral angle of Right eye with redness. (3) 1.5 x 1 cm. transverse abrasion on left floor of 1 cm. lateral to midline with posterior to Mandible border 2 cm. inferolateral to tip of chin with reddish. (4) 0.3 x 0.3 cm. inferolateral to left eye with redness with abrasions. (2) 0.3 x 0.3 cm. abrasion 1 cm. below lateral angle of Right eye with redness. (3) 1.5 x 1 cm. transverse abrasion on left floor of 1 cm. lateral to midline with posterior to Mandible border 2 cm. inferolateral to tip of chin with reddish. (4) 0.3 x 0.3 cm. inferior lateral to tip of chine, redness. (5) 0.3 x 0.3 cm. abrasion over lateral of right middle line with redness. (6) 0.5 x 0.5 cm. abrasion on posterior lateral with infero right lateral with redness. (7) 3 abrasions 0.3 x 0.3 cm. 0.2 cm. x 0.2 cm., 0.2 x 0.2. cm. on Dorsey of Rt. hand 1 cm. from meta carpophalyangeal joint near with reddish. (8) 2 x 1.5 cm. transverse abrasion on calf of Right leg back area 3 cm. from lateral poditeal fossa with redness. (9) 0.4 x 0.4 cm. abrasion on back of left posterior neck of 1 cm. left to mandible 1 cm. below hair line area with 3 cm. above nape of neck with redness. (10) 3 x 2 cm. vertical abrasion on left lower costal area 5 cm. left to midline 8 cm. below scapula with redness. (11) Contused abrasion over right side hypo choudoiny area 4 x 3 cm. with redness. 19 (1) Head : (1) The injuries under the skin and their type : (1) 4 x 2 cm. under skin scalp contusion over Right Pareto occipital region from parietal eminence with full thickness with vertically. (2) Transverse 4 x 3.5 cm. under scalp contusion on middle and right occipital region with thick blood clots layers (+) 19 (2) (2) Upper and lower region of scalp-fracture, its location, size, direction, etc. be mentioned : 19 Brain : (3) Appearance of internal substance, size, weight and on examination of the organ, any abnormality if any, found be mentioned in detail. (Weight of the brain of a male 3 pounds, Weight of the brain of a female 2.75 pounds) Brain tissues soft and patcheal spotting of haemorrhagic patches with over both cerebrally. Brain and meninges are congested, Oedematious with vessels congestion (+) Neck: Left side Nape neck region contusion 8 x 5 cm. (Weight of the brain of a male 3 pounds, Weight of the brain of a female 2.75 pounds) Brain tissues soft and patcheal spotting of haemorrhagic patches with over both cerebrally. Brain and meninges are congested, Oedematious with vessels congestion (+) Neck: Left side Nape neck region contusion 8 x 5 cm. with blood clots Oedematious with vessel congestive contusions (+) with eminence muscles stab muscle contusion (+) 20 Structure of Chest : (a) wall, ribs, tender bones: (b) wall of lungs : (c) neck, nose and clone: (d) right lung : Haemorrhagic contuse the thoracic cage wall muscle with back side and left side of upper chest wall (+) Congested Congested & frothy mucous over trachea and air passages (+) Both the lungs contusions (+) left side lung both the lobes and Right side upper middle back contused( +) with frothy blooding middle discharge with defuse of Lung (+) 21 Abdomen: Wall : Internal wall of abdomen (Peritoneum) : Cavity, liver, buttocks ... : mouth hole, teeth, tongue and neck : neck: Esophagus : Liver and the substances found therein ...: Small intestine and the substances found therein; Large intestine and the substances found therein; Liver and Gall Bladder; Supranels : Spleen (with weight) ; Kidneys (with weight) After opening of the abdominal walls and Pentoneal cavity full of blood (+) in abdominal cavity 700 cc blood with clots( + ) Haemorrhagic contusions over the right sole lat wall of abdominal 7 back of abdominal, with back side of abdomen above left side retroperitoneal, haemorrhagic contusions( + ) Left lobe of Liver teasing with contusions 4 x 3 cm. x 2 cm. and bleeding (+) Right lobe of Liver 2.8 x 2.5 x 1.8 cm. and bleeding with Pale Spheric contusions( +) over left side tradeolateral with pale. Both Kidneys contusions (+) left side kidney more contusions with upper and middle pole with blood clots( +) with Pale. 23 Cause of Death, Opinion. With regard to possible cause of death : Cause of death is shock and Haemorrhage due to multiple sustained injuries over body, however, viscera preserved for and sent for F.S.L. for C.A. of death: According to his opinion, the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to multiple sustained injuries over body. 18. So far as the evidence of police witnesses is concerned, it appears that they have supported the prosecution story in chief examinations. 18. So far as the evidence of police witnesses is concerned, it appears that they have supported the prosecution story in chief examinations. At the same time, in their cross-examinations, nothing helpful to the defence has come out. 19. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, especially the medical evidence, it clearly transpires that though there was no serious external injury on the body of the deceased, but there were serious internal injuries on the body of the deceased which has resulted to her death. It also transpires from the evidence of the eye-witness that the present accused has seriously beaten the deceased with kick and fist blows. It also emerges from the record that the age of the minor girl was just 4 years and yet the accused has mercilessly beaten her. 20. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, it clearly transpires that this is not a case of a just simple injury. It also appears from the record that the accused was frequently quarrelling with Shabina as deceased was residing with them and he was disliking such residing of deceased with Shabina and was angry for that. This shows that there was motive on the part of the accused for beating the deceased who was just 4 years of age. 21. In view of the peculiar facts of this case, a reliance has been placed by Mr. Patadiya, on the judgment of this Court in the case of Govindbhai Vagabhai Chavda (supra) is not helpful to the accused in the present case. In the said decision, there was evidence that the father has beaten the son with stick only for the reasons that the son has not gone to the school and in that view of the matter, the Court was of the opinion that the conviction under Sec. 302 was not proper and converted it into Sec. 304, Part-I. In the facts of the present case, it is evident from the entire evidence that the accused has mercilessly beaten the deceased and has caused her death. 22. 22. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court, it clearly transpires that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has properly appreciated the entire evidence on record and has taken into consideration the relevant aspects of the case and has also given cogent and convincing reasons in convicting the accused for the said offence and there is no infirmity whatsoever in the impugned judgment and order which deserves to be sustained. On re-appreciation of the evidence also, it clearly appears that the learned Sessions Judge has not committed any error of facts and law in convicting the accused for the charge levelled against him. 23. Before parting with the judgment, this Court would like to state that the Supreme Court in the case Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2013 (6) SCC 770 , has observed that while the award or refusal of compensation in a particular case may be within the Court's discretion, there exists a mandatory duty on the Court to apply its mind to the question in every criminal case. It is also observed therein that it is also beyond dispute that the occasion to consider the question of award of compensation would logically arise only after the Court records a conviction of the accused. Capacity of the accused to pay which constitutes an important aspect of any order under Sec. 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code would involve a certain enquiry albeit summary unless of course the facts as emerging in the course of the trial are so clear that the Court considers it unnecessary to do so. Such an enquiry can precede an order on sentence to enable the Court to take a view, both on the question of sentence and compensation that it may in its wisdom decide to award to the victim or his/her family. 24. Now, considering the factual aspects of the case, it appears that the parties of the case are coming from lower strata of the society, and therefore, it may not be possible for the accused to pay compensation under Sec. 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 24. Now, considering the factual aspects of the case, it appears that the parties of the case are coming from lower strata of the society, and therefore, it may not be possible for the accused to pay compensation under Sec. 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, in view of the Victim Compensation Scheme, which has been framed by the State of Gujarat, in pursuance of Sec. 357 A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 which is called 'the Gujarat Victim Compensation Scheme, 2016' which has been amended from time to time, wherein Para 5 thereof, procedure for grant of compensation other than acid attack can be resorted to. Under the provisions of Para 5 thereof, it is provided that whenever a recommendation is made by the Court under sub-secs. (2) and (3) of Sec. 357 A of the Code or an application is made by any victim or his dependent under sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 357 A of the Code to the District Legal Service Authority or the State Legal Service Authority, as the case may be, the District Legal Service Authority or the State Legal Service Authority shall examine the case and verify the contents of the claim with regard to the loss or injury caused to victim/claimant and arising out of the reported criminal act and may call for any other relevant information necessary in order to determine genuineness of the case and occurrence of the incidence. The provision has also been set out for providing minimum amount of compensation for the various injuries/loss. One of the loss is death. Therefore, in view of this scheme, the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority may be recommended for deciding the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the dependent of the deceased. Accordingly, the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority shall decide the quantum of the compensation to be awarded under the aforesaid scheme to the dependent of the deceased. The State Legal Service Authority may act and take necessary action under the aforesaid scheme, accordingly. Along with the copy of the F.I.R., the copy of this judgment is directed to be sent to the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority for doing needful in the matter. 25. In view of the above, the present appeal is devoid of merits and it deserves to be dismissed. Resultantly, it is dismissed. Along with the copy of the F.I.R., the copy of this judgment is directed to be sent to the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority for doing needful in the matter. 25. In view of the above, the present appeal is devoid of merits and it deserves to be dismissed. Resultantly, it is dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 29-3-2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 353 of 2012 is hereby confirmed. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Appeal dismissed.