JANUJI ARJANJI THAKORE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgement and order dated 08.02.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Court, Patan in Sessions Case No. 84 of 2006 whereby the appellant-convict has been convicted of the offence under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and is inter alia sentenced to life imprisonment and is ordered to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for one year. The appellant-convict is acquitted of the offence under section 504 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 06.07.2006 at about 08.30 pm while the complainant was going to village Chalvada when he reached three cross roads of primary school of Chalvada village he heard some shouts coming from the way towards Harijan Mohalla. He therefore rushed towards Harijan Mohalla and saw that the appellant-convict was holding a knife (Chhari) in his hand while original accused no. 2 Arjan Vihaji Thakore was holding dhariya, original accused no. 3 ­ Vihaji Ramsibhai Thakore was holding stick and original accused no. 4 ­ Vaghaji Saktaji Thakore was holding a knife in his hand. It is further the prosecution case that all the accused persons had caught hold the brother of the complainant ­ Ramesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the victim/ the deceased') and were asking as to why he was having illicit relation with the sister of accused no. 1. Inspite of the victim denying such allegations, original accused no. 1 ­ present appellant gave a knife blow on the neck of the victim while accused no. 4 gave another knife blow on the shoulder of the victim. It is the say of the complainant that accused nos. 2 & 3 were shouting that the victim should not be left alive. Seeing the entire episode, the complainant raised shouts and therefore the complainant's wife, uncle Varsang and Manaben Chelaji Thakore rushed to the scene of offence. However, the accused persons ran away. The victim succumbed to the injuries within short time.

(3.) MR . LR Pujari, learned APP has strongly supported the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court and submitted that the same does not call for any interference by this Court. He has submitted that the prosecution has proved the case against the present appellant beyond doubt.