STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PARMAR BIPINBHAI MANILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 17.4.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 97 of 2001, whereby, the learned trial Judge acquitted the original accused the respondents herein, of the charges for the offence punishable under Section 147,148,149,324,337,504 and 506(2)of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 10.10.96 the meeting of the Bhimapura Gram Panchayat was kept on the upper floor of Dudh Mandali. The complainant is a member of the Gram Panchayat. The respondent Harijan Hirabhai Manganbhai is also a member of the Gram Panchayat. Therefore, both of them attended the meeting. In the meeting, the accused Harijan Hirabhai Maganbhai wanted to construct a toilet near his area. The Sarpanch of Bhimpura Gram Panchayat Shri Kanjibhai Govindbhai Chaudhary told him that the toilet would be constructed on getting permission from the Taluka Panchayat. However, Hirabhai insisted that toilet should be constructed immediately. The complainant also informed that such toilet should be constructed only with the permission of the Taluka Panchayat. On hearing this, Harijan Hirabhai Maganbhai got excited and left the meeting by speaking words without any restraint. That at about 6.00p.m. in the evening, the accused formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to attack the complainant and witnesses and cause injuries to them. The unlawful assembly was assembled on the road and on hearing the hubbub, the complainant came out of his house, when he saw the exchange of words between his nephew Dilipbhai Ramabhai. Hirabhai asked Dilipbhai as to why his uncle was not permitting the accused Hirabhai to construct toilet. So saying, he caught hold of Dilipbhai, the vessel of milk, which Dilipbhai had with him, fell from his hand and the milk spead over the ground. In the meantime, Parmar Manilal Maganlal came with a sword and Bipinbhai Manilal came with stick, Harshad Manilal, Ramilaben Manilal, Motoben Manilal, Ramiben Maganbhai Kusabhai and Motiben Somabhai etc. spoke abusive words and Manilal Maganlal Parmar gave a sword blow on the hand of Manibhai Dalabhai and other persons started pelting stones. In the meantime, the complainant and his wife Kamuben intervened and the accused went away to their house by speaking abusive words and also by giving threat to cause death. Therefore, the complaint was lodged. Necessary investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, respondents were arrested and, ultimately, charge -sheet was filed against them, which was numbered as Sessions Case No. 97 of 2001. The trial was initiated against the respondents.

(3.) TO prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has examined witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.