STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BIJAL HAMIRBHAI BHARVAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State of Gujarat-appellant/original complainant has preferred this Appeal under section 378 (1) (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ["CrPC" for short] against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 205 of 1994 dated 31st January 2006 by which, the respondent is acquitted of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ["IPC" for short] and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, since prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt before the trial Court.

(2.) As per case of the prosecution, on 8th September 1994 in the outskirts of village-Khakhana, the opponent accused in the field owned and occupied by the respondent herein, one Naranbhai Raghavbhai had entered into the field for the purpose of grazing of his cattle and due to which, a scuffle took place in which the respondent-Bijal Hamirbhia inflicted blows of stick on the head and back part of the body of Naranbhai Raghavbhai, who succumbed to injuries after six days during treatment in a private hospital at Rajkot. At the end of investigation and on filing of the charge sheet and committal of case, being Sessions Case No. 205 of 1994, the trial Court acquitted the respondent.

(3.) Ms. Moxa Thakker, learned APP made strenuous efforts to pursue us about acquittal of the respondent duly established and proved, but not believed by the learned trial Judge by taking us through the entire record of the case and specifically the testimonies of Mavjibhai Dhanabhai [PW-7 : Exh. 40]; Dhirubhai Naranbhai Koli, complainant and son of the deceased [PW-1 : Exh. 6]; Samjuben Naranbhai Bavaria-wife of the deceased [PW-8 : Exh. 41]; Dr. Prakashchandra Gokuldas Moddha [PW-14 : Exh. 58]; Police witness PSI-Thakardas Kashiram [PW-10 : Exh. 43] and other panch witnesses and submitted that initially there may be lapses on the part of the police authority in registering the complaint and FIR so disclosed by the sons of the injured and deceased, but once investigation had commenced, mystery about death was unfolded by following proper procedure; which include drawing of panchnama of the scene of offence, inquest, sending various articles seized and controlled-earth taken from the scene of offence to FSL which duly get support of eye witness Mavjibhai Dhanjibhai, son and wife of the deceased who were first in time to reach the scene of offence as informed by said Mavjibhai and further corroboration from oral as well as documentary evidences, and therefore, order of acquittal deserves to be quashed and set-aside by allowing the appeal and sentencing the accused for the offence for which he was charged.