STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JATMALEK KESHARKHAN @ KASHO JIVANJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.10.1999, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, in Sessions Case No.66 of 1996, whereby all three respondents, original accused, have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 323, 324 and 325 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 . Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case

(2.) ARE that on 12.07.1992, at about 3:00 PM, the complainant Kuka Bhura Bharwad, accompanied by Karna Gaga, entered the boundary of Village Lilapur, with their cattle. The cattle were drinking water at Salasa Pond when the accused persons told the complainant that they would lock up the cattle in an enclosure. Upon this, the complainant stated that there has been no damage, therefore, why should the cattle be locked up. The accused persons got agitated and started beating the complainant with sticks. The complainant sustained an injury on his left hand. Karna Gaga intervened to save the complainant. The accused also beat Karna Gaga with sticks on his hand, head, arms and entire body, resulting in serious injuries. It is further the case of the prosecution that at the relevant point of time, a Notification was in force, prohibiting the carrying of certain weapons such as sticks, that were used in the offence.

(3.) MR .K.L. Pandya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court is erroneous inasmuch as the accused persons have been acquitted on the basis of an improper appreciation of evidence. It is further submitted that the complaint and the deposition of the complainant are in consonance with each other. Moreover, the evidence of the Doctor is clear that injury No.2 sustained by Karna Gaga, was a grievous one. It is further submitted that the complainant suffered other injuries and, therefore, there was sufficient evidence on record in support of the case of the prosecution. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment and order be quashed and set aside and the appeal be allowed.