STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. NARESHBHAI HARIBHAI TANDEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short, nonetheless the question of quite great importance that arises for our consideration in this acquittal appeal is -

(2.) To state few relevant facts as far as they are absolutely necessary to appreciate and resolve the point raised above, in substance, it is the prosecution case that the incident in question, wherein Babubhai Panchabhai came to be seriously injured by Nareshbhai Haribhai Tandel and three others, who were armed with weapons like knife, hockey stick, dharia, etc. took place on 1-3-1991 at 19-00 hours in the Machhiwad Navsarjan Falia (locality), at Village Onjal (Valsad District). On the basis of this allegation, the +accused came to be tried for the alleged offences punishable under Sees. 307, 323, 1 14 of I. P. Code read with Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, by the learned Sessions Judge, Valsad at Navsari, wherein he, at the end of the trial by a judgment and order dated 12-9-1994 acquitted them on the short ground that Babubhai Panchabhai, the principal injured witness having gone to America could not be examined despite several opportunities given to the prosecution, giving rise to the present appeal.

(3.) When this appeal came up for admission before us on 1-9-1995, we issued Notice to the Respondents-accused, and in response to the same, Mr. B. P. Dalal, learned Advocate has filed appearance. Mr. Dalal submitted that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the learned trial Judge has committed any substantial error in recording the order of acquittal, and in that view of the matter, no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order of acquittal at this stage.