STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VISHNUBHAI KACHARADAS GANGARAM PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant - State Ms. C.M. Shah and learned Advocate for the opponent/respondent Ms. Sadhana Sagar.

(2.) BY way of this Appeal, the State has felt aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.04.2013 of the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mahesana in Sessions Case No. 101/2011 whereby the respondent herein - original accused was convicted and sentenced as under: -

(3.) LEARNED Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M. Shah has submitted that the State has desired to prefer this Appeal for enhancement of sentence passed by the learned Judge. It is submitted that the learned Judge has not given any particular reason for imposing lesser sentence upon the accused. It is further submitted that the learned Judge ought to have appreciated the oral evidence of the injured viz. Amratji Velaji Thakore, who has categorically deposed in his testimony that on the day of the incident, the respondent accused had come armed with a sword, had assaulted him and caused severe injuries on the vital parts of the body only with a view to kill him and hence, he called the police and thus escaped from near death. The said aspect is corroborated by way of oral as well as documentary evidence on record. The evidence of the medical officer also states that the injuries received on the body of the victim could only be possible by way of the muddamal sword; the said sword was recovered from the accused and seized under the panchnama. The FSL report also stated that the muddamal sword had blood stains of the victim. Thus, it is submitted that the learned Judge ought to have appreciated the fact that the respondent had given the sword blow on the injured witness on the vital part of the body with an intention to kill the victim. It is also submitted that the police personnel were also witness to the alleged incident, who were present at the place of offence pursuant to the telephonic information and they had also seen the respondent accused running behind the injured witness with a sword and have deposed about the same in their testimonies. In view of the above, it is submitted that this is a fit case which requires the interference of this Court and the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahesana requires to be upturned.