MANSUKHBHAI @ MANUBHAI DEVAJIBHAI TANK Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is preferred by the original accused no. 2 present appellant against the judgement and order of conviction and sentence dated 13.01.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Amreli in Sessions Case No. 87 of 2004. The original accused was ordered to undergo imprisonment for life for offence under sections 394 & 302 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant had lodged a complaint interalia stating that the younger brother of the priest of Rokadia Hanuman temple was killed the previous day night and that the whereabouts of the killer were not known. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant had stated that two persons disguised as Sadhus had come to the temple the previous night and had stayed at the temple.

(3.) Mr. Mrudul Barot, learned advocate appearing for the appellant original accused no. 2 has drawn the attention of this Court to the evidence of P.W. 10 & 11 and submitted that there is nothing on record to establish that the present appellant is involved in this case except the complaint and the evidence of P.Ws. 10 & 11. He submitted that in absence of any eye witness in the present case, the trial court has erred in convicting the appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence when the chain has not been completed by the prosecution. He submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and that there is no corroborative piece of evidence against the accused and therefore the accused deserves to be acquitted. Mr. Barot has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Pohalya Motya Valvi vs. State of Maharashtra, 1980 1 SCC 530 and submitted that each circumstance relied upon by the prosecution must be established by cogent, succinct and reliable evidence and that the circumstance must be of an incriminating character.