STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KANUBHAI RAVJIBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is preferred by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Court, Navsari, on 15th of February, 2006, in Sessions Case No. 163 of 1997, whereby the present respondent Kanubhai Ravjibhai Patel came to be acquitted by the Sessions Court for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) AS per the prosecution case, the complaint of this incident was offered by Rameshbhai Dhirubhai Patel, resident of village Ghatki, Taluka Chikhli, District Navsari. It appears that, during trial, complainant Rameshbahi Dhirubhai Patel died. According to the complaint, Rameshbhai had been to Bilimora for his personal work on 16th of June, 1995 and thereafter he returned to Chikhli at about 11.00 p.m. from Bilimora, and from Bilimora he started towards his village Ghatki. While he was passing through Nishal Falia, near the house of the accused at about 23.30 hours, the accused suggested him to stop. The complainant stopped there and between them exchange of words took place about withdrawal of the cases filed by the complainant against the accused. In the said exchange, accused was provoked and inflicted a blow on the head of the complainant by one iron rod, and due to this injury, complainant started bleeding from the wound inflicted. The complainant thereafter on his motorcycle, straightaway reached to the house of one Amratbhai Manilal Patel, Ex -Sarpanch of the village and informed him about the incident which had taken place. Amratbhai advised the complainant injured to go to the police station and to file a complaint. Therefore, on 17th of June, 1995, at about 00.30 hours, both of them reached at Chikhli Police Station and offered the complaint. The said FIR was registered as Crime Register No. 158/95 and the investigation was entrusted to Police Inspector Harendrasinh Kiritsinh Rana, and after investigation by him as well as his subsequent Investigating Officer, a charge sheet came to be submitted in the Court of learned Magistrate against the accused. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges for the above said offence against the accused vide Exhibit -1 on 14th of March, 2000. The accused pleaded not guilty and, hence, the prosecution examined witnesses and produced documentary evidence on record. Thereafter, on evidence being over, a further statement of the accused was recorded by the Trial Judge under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The defence of the accused was of total denial of the incident as narrated by the prosecution, and in explanation, the accused stated that he was framed by the complainant in the above said criminal case.

(3.) AFTER hearing the prosecution as well as defence, the learned Trial Judge came to the above conclusion of acquitting the accused for the above said charges, as aforesaid, and, hence, this Appeal by the State. The learned APP Mr. I.M. Pandya was heard in detail in respect of this Appeal at this stage of admission. We have called for the Record and Proceedings from the Trial Court and learned APP has supplied xerox copies of the evidence and necessary documents. We have carefully gone through the evidence recorded during trial on vital features and reasonable probabilities of the case at this stage.