STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RATHOD DILIPSINH G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant - State of Gujarat preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the legality and validity of impugned judgment and order rendered by learned J.M.F.C., Idar on 9.3.1994, recording acquittal of the respondent herein - original accused in Criminal Case No. 1080 of 1992 from the charge of offences punishable under Section 323, 324, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) THE prosecution case in nutshell is that the incident occurred on 10.7.1992 at 7 am in the village called Limbhoi, Tal. Idar. At the time of the incident, the first informant Dayaji Nathaji, injured witness Revaji Nathaji and witness Laxmanji Nathaji had visited Milk Society of their village for giving the milk. The respondent - accused was working with said Society. With regard to the measurement of the milk, there was some altercation with respondent - accused and the accused spoke abusive language and abruptly sprinkled acid on the body of injured witness Revaji Nathaji. In the incident, witness Manjulaben also sustained injuries. First informant Dayaji Nathaji lodged first information report in Idar police station, which came to be registered. Police commenced investigation. After completion of the investigation, chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of the learned Magistrate, which was registered as Criminal Case No. 1080 of 1992.

(3.) CHARGE came to be framed at Exh.14, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the completion of the oral evidence adduced by the prosecution, the further statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., to which the accused denied generally all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution and stated that at the time of the incident, witness Revaji Nathaji started quarrel with him and he was assaulted by Revaji Nathaji and to save himself from the assault, he raised his hand and at that time, the vessel (tapeli), which was in the hand of Revaji Nathaji abruptly came in contact with the bulb containing the acid and bulb was broken and the acid was sprinkled. After appreciating the evidence on record and the submission made on behalf of both the sides, the learned Magistrate recorded the acquittal of the respondent - accused. Therefore, the State challenged the impugned judgment and order by preferring this appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C.