STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHALU HOTHI KOLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals are preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.3.1998 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj -Kutch, in Sessions Case No. 46 of 1997, whereby the accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") and ordered to undergo fifteen months' imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 11,000/ -, and in default of payment of fine, accused was ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment for twelve months. On payment of fine, an amount of Rs. 10,000/ - was ordered to be paid to the injured Bharat Bachu Koli. The accused was acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, Criminal Appeal No. 364 of 1998 is preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence imposed upon the accused, while Criminal Appeal No. 365 of 1998 is preferred against acquittal of accused from the charges of offence punishable under Ss. 307 of IPC. Since both these appeals are arising out of one case and evidence is common in both the appeals, the same are taken up for hearing together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to the filing of present appeals are as under: -

(3.) So far as Criminal Appeal No. 365 of 1998, which is preferred against acquittal of the accused is concerned, Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP has taken us through the evidence and contended that the trial Court has committed an error in acquitting the accused inspite of voluminous evidence against him and contended that the trial Court ought not to have acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC. She submitted that though the prosecution has examined 19 witnesses and also produced 14 documents in support of its case, the learned trial Judge has not properly appreciated them and acquitted the accused of the charge of offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC levelled against him. She submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the accused. She submitted that even the medical evidence supports the case of the prosecution. She further submitted that the accused had inflicted five blows of knife on the body of the victim and such blows were given on vital parts of the body. Therefore, looking to the injuries and medical evidence in this regard, it is clear that the intention of the accused was to kill Bharat Bhachu. Therefore, she submitted that the accused should not have been acquitted from the charge of offence under Sec. 307 of IPC. She submitted that the learned trial Judge has failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its proper perspective and, therefore, the impugned judgment is required to be quashed and set aside by allowing present appeal.