(1.) These two appeals arise from the same judgment passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Gujarat whereby the respondents herein were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Ss. 144, 148, 302 read with S. 149 and S. 135 of Bombay Police Act. Among the five respondents, the 5th respondent passed away during the pendency of the appeals. All the respondents were found guilty by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Surat for all the offences charged against them and for the main offence under S. 302 read with S. 149, they had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
(2.) In the appeal filed by these respondents, the High Court was of the view that the prosecution failed to bring home their guilt. Accused No. 5 was the paternal uncle of deceased-Natwarlal Bhanubhai. Accused No. 2 is the son-in-law of accused No. 5. Accused No. 1 is a brother of accused No. 2. Accused No. 3 and accused No. 4 are cousin of accused No. 2. The prosecution case was that on 13th November, 1985, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and went to the house of the deceased and forcibly took him to a nearby Babul tree and caused him a series of injuries and he died on the spot. P.W. 7 is the widow of deceased and P.W. 4 is the son of the deceased. At the time of the incident, some children were playing in the neighbourhood. On seeing the assault, they made a noise and after hearing the noise, P.W. 2, P.W. 3 and P.W. 11, the brother of the deceased came to the place of occurrence. P.W. 11 took the injured Natwarlal Bhanubhai to the Civil Hospital at Surat where the Doctor examined him and declared him to be dead.
(3.) From the side of the prosecution, P.W. 7 and P.W. 4 were examined as eye-witnesses. P.W. 11, who gave the FI statement deposed that he had seen the accused persons at the place of the incident. The High Court held that there were certain infirmities in the prosecution case, and hence the accused persons were not guilty of the offences charged against them.