SURATSANG RAGHAVJIBHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.06.2008 passed in Sessions Case No.11 of 2005 by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Limbdi recording conviction of the appellant-accused for the offence under Sections 307, 326 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and imposing rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.300/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, imposing rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.300/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, imposing simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for seven days under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code and also imposing simple imprisonment for fifteen days and fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for four days under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act,

(2.) The facts of the case briefly summarized are that as it transpires from the material and evidence on record that on 22.10.2004 at 11:00, the complainant, accompanied by his wife, had gone to his field for his work and after completing work, when they were returning to the house on cycle, the accused are is stated to have assaulted them with dharia. At that time, the accused no.2 had also caused injuries with stone to the wife of the complainant, who tried to intervene to save the complainant. In this connection, complaint was filed, which was registered as C.R.No.I-99/2004 with Muli Police Station for the offences under Sections 307, 326, 337, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. At the conclusion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed for the alleged offences. As the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, same was committed to the Court of Sessions, where it was numbered as Sessions Case No.11/2005. Thereafter, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Limbdi framed against the accused for the alleged offences and proceeded with the trial.

(3.) In order to bring home the charge leveled against the accused, the prosecution has examined several witnesses including the complainant-injured and his wife and has also produced several documentary evidence in support of its case, which shall be referred to hereinafter.