MAGANBHAI GALABHAI SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Anandjiwala, learned advocate for the applicant, learned A.P.P. Ms.Mehta for respondent No.1 ?State through video conferencing. At this stage, Mr.Yash Dave appears and states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent no.2 and he will file his Vakalatnama within couple of days.

(2.) Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents waives service of notice of rule. Considering the short dispute involved as also the settlement between the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(3.) An F.I.R. being C.R. No.I ?28 of 2007 came to be registered with Halvad Police Station on 27.3.2007 alleging that children were playing nearby the house of the first informant and they were using filthy language while playing. Therefore, the first informant refrained them from playing near his house. Due to that there was hot exchange of words and due to this animosity on 28.3.2007 at around 8 p.m. applicant no.1 inflicted knife blow on lower left waist of one Gauriben and applicant nos.2 and 3 gave stick blows to the first informant and other accused persons gave fist blows and also threats to their life. Gauriben received injuries and she was treated at a hospital. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded by investigating officer, panchnama of scene of offence was drawn and recovery panchnama was also drawn. Thereafter, charge sheet was filed before learned Magistrate, Halvad, which culminated into Criminal Case No.105 of 2007. Trial Coiurt framed charges against the accused and at the end of trial, by judgment dated 31. applicant no.1 inflicted knife blow on lower left waist of one Gauriben and applicant nos.2 and 3 gave stick blows to the first informant and other accused persons gave fist blows and also threats to their life. Gauriben received injuries and she was treated at a hospital. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded by investigating officer, panchnama of scene of offence was drawn and recovery panchnama was also drawn. Thereafter, charge sheet was filed before learned Magistrate, Halvad, which culminated into Criminal Case No.105 of 2007. Trial Coiurt framed charges against the accused and at the end of trial, by judgment dated 31.3.2016 the accused were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 324 and 114 of IPC and they were acquitted from the charges of offence under Section 504 and 506 (2) of IPC . By the said judgment, 6 months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/ ? were imposed for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and in default, 10 days simple imprisonment was awarded. Three months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/ ? was imposed for offence under Section 323 of IPC and in default, 5 days simple imprisonment was awarded. This judgment was challenged in appeal being Criminal Appeal No.24 of 2016 before learned Sessions Judge, Morbi, which came to be rejected by confirming the judgment of learned Magistrate. Against both these decisions, present revision is preferred by the revisionists.