PRATAPSING MAHENDRASING SIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant convict has preferred this appeal and challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, Bharuch at Rajpipla on 31.3.2005 in Sessions Case No.125 of 2004 convicting him for the offence u/s 302 of the IPC and sentencing him to life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.250/-, in default thereof to undergo SI for one month.

(2.) It is the prosecution case that on 27.4.2004 at about 22:00 hrs., the accused made assault with stick on Jashwantsing Pritamsing and caused him injuries resulting into his death.

(3.) On the basis of the first information report lodged by Gurumukhsing Jitsing, offence was registered and investigation was started. During the course of investigation, Panchnamas were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded and dead body was sent for postmortem. At the end of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against the accused for the aforesaid offence. As the offence against the appellants was triable by the Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Sessions Court and it was registered as Sessions Case No.125 of 2004. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge Exh-5 for the aforesaid offence against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution adduced evidence. On completion of recording of evidence, the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence against the accused was explained to him. The accused in their further statement recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, stated that he is innocent and the complainant with a view to save his brother has filed false complaint. It is further stated that the witnesses are interested witnesses and hence, the complainant and his father did not get the job of protecting sim, and as the job was assigned to the persons related to him, false complaint is filed. After hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned advocate for the appellant accused, the trial Court recorded that the prosecution has successfully proved the charge levelled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and therefore, convicted him as mentioned hereinbefore. Being aggrieved by the said decision, the accused have preferred this appeal.