STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JIBHAI MANABHAI VAGHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents were tried before the learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Sessions Case No. 91 of 1981 for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C on the allegation that in furtherance of their common intention to cause the death of Raghu Mana, they gave blows with a stick on the head, leg and other parts of the body of Raghu and caused his death.

(2.) Being dissatisfied with the order of acquittal the State has filed his appeal before this Court.

(3.) The facts of the prosecution case, briefly stated are as follows: The deceased was the husband of one Jadaben. P.W. 2. Ex. 8. Respondent No.1. Jibhai original accused No. 1, is the younger brother of the said Raghu Mana, while respondent No-2-original accused No.2. Somabhai is the son of another younger brother of the deceased. Some land left by the father of the deceased Raghu Mana is in possession of accused No.1. There was some dispute with regard for the property between the deceased and No.1. Accused No.1 wanted to sell away the said land and for that purpose wanted the consent of the deceased, but the deceased was not giving his consent. On the night previous to the date of this incident, the two accused went near the Den of Mataji when the deceased and Jadaben were in their wada. The accused gave abuses and then went away. Then on the next day i.e. on 1-11-1980 at about 10 A.M. the accused went to the house of the deceased with sticks in their hands. The deceased, Jadaben, his wife and daughter Dahiben, P.W. 7, Ex. 31 were sitting on their at a. Accused No.1 suddenly gave a stick blow on the head of the deceased and another blow on the forehead of the deceased where upon the deceased fell down. Accused No.2. then gave in all four blows on the thigh. Narsi Parsottam came there in the meantime and rescued the deceased and the accused went away. Complaint was given about this incident by Bai Jada. Police registered the offence and started investigation. The deceased was treated for the injuries sustained by him, but ultimately he succumbed to the injuries on 22-11- 1980. The respondents-accused were tried before the learned Sessions Judge on these allegations. The say of the accused No 1. was that of total denial, while the say of accused No.2 was that he was attacked by the deceased and injuries were caused to him by the deceased and in self-defence he whirled the stick which might have hit the deceased, but he could not say on what part of the body the deceased was hit. It may be mentioned here that on that very day accused No.2 also gave a complaint before the Police which was recorded in the N C. Register about the incident stating therein that he was attacked by the deceased and injuries were caused to him by the deceased. He also submitted one application to the Police Officer on the same day stating therein that he was attacked by the deceased and he in turn whirled the stick but he could not say on which part of the body the deceased was hit.