STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. LAKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Junagadh passed in Sessions Case No. 27 of 2006, one preferred by the State challenging the acquittal of the original accused for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and another appeal preferred by the State for enhancement of the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, imposed while convicting the original accused for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and giving benefit of Probation of Offenders Act to the original accused, both these appeals are decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such by impugned judgment and order, the learned trial Court has convicted the original accused for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, however thereafter has given benefit of probation to the original accused. It is required to be noted that as such the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court holding the original accused guilty for the offences under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code has attained the finality so far as original accused is concerned and as such original accused has accepted the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge convicting the original accused for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Under the circumstances, the questions which are required to be considered by this Court is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the learned trial Court has erred in not convicting the original accused for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, for which, he was initially charged and/or whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the learned trial Court has justified in giving benefit of probation to the original accused while convicting the original accused for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code?

(3.) Shri Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently submitted that the learned trial Court has materially erred in not convicting the original accused for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.