PRADIPBHAI CHANDUBHAI GANAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of these appeals original accused as well as the complainant have challenged the judgement and order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dahod in Sessions Case No. 05 of 2011 whereby the trial court has convicted and sentenced the accused as under. Criminal Appeal No. 1932 of 2012 has been preferred by original accused against his conviction whereas Criminal Appeal No. 1626 of 2013 has been preferred by the complainant for enhancement of sentence imposed upon accused. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_128_LAWS(GJH)5_2016.htm</FRM>

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that the marriage ceremony of the daughter of one Shri Ramjibhai was arranged at Kharod village on 08.03.2010. The village people had gathered in the ceremony among which the accused was also present. It is the case of the prosecution that when the groom and his family members arrived, a local dance took place and in the midst of the entire celebration a firing took place from the gun allegedly found held by the accused in which three persons were found injured and a girl named Pintuben died.

(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the accused submitted that the gun from which the firing took place though sent to FSL, no ballistic report has been found submitted by the investigating agency; that the impugned order is silent on the aspect as to whether the shots were fired from the gun recovered from the spot of incident; that the eye witness on the spot of incident had not given full account of incident and looking to their depositions. It is further submitted that the complainant had given contradictory versions in the FIR as per which the accused was seen standing at the site of marriage more particularly having rested on the bike whereas the charge framed by the trial court unequivocally states that the accused was dancing with the gun held by him. Learned advocate for the accused has drawn the attention of this Court to the evidence of witnesses and submitted that there are contradictions and variations in the evidence of the witnesses.