HARJI MAKANBHAI DHAMASIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order rendered in Sessions Case No. 111 of 1995 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot dated 21.7.2009 recording the conviction of the Appellant/Original Accused for the offence under Sec. 307 and sentencing him R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 50,000/ - and in default S.I. for 2 years as stated in detail in the judgment. The compensation has also been ordered to be paid as stated in the impugned judgment.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly summarized are that the complainant and the present accused are the relatives as the wife of the accused and the wife of the complainant are sisters and in fact there are cross complaints which have been registered as the present Sessions Case No. 111 of 1995 where Dahyabhai Kanjibhai Patel is the complainant and the Appellant is the accused whereas in Sessions Case No. 62 of 2004 the present Accused Harji Makanbhai Patel is the complainant and Dahyabhai Kanjibhai Patel and Harji Kanjibhai Patel are the Accused. As it transpires from the material and evidence on record there was some quarrel in the field when the accused as well as the complainant confronted each other near the well. The present Appellant/Original Accused in Sessions Case No. 111 of 1995 is said to have ran the tractor towards the complainant resulting in a quarrel and the accused is said to have assaulted, as a result of which the leg of the complainant was required to be amputated. Therefore the FIR came to be registered as FIR No. 4 of 1995 with Padhdhari Police Station for the offence under Sec. 307 IPC. Similarly, the cross complaint was registered as FIR No. 3 of 1995. Therefore there were two cases being Sessions Case No. 111 of 1995 from which the present Appeal has arisen and Sessions Case No. 62 of 2004.

(3.) After the investigation was over the charge sheet was filed and as the offence under Sec. 307 IPC is triable by the court of Sessions, it was committed to the court of Sessions. Thereafter the learned Sessions Judge framed the charges for the offence under Sec. 307 IPC and proceeded with the trial.