SHANTILAL MANSUKHBHAI BHIL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgement and order of conviction dated 13. 1. 2004 passed by the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 91/2002, whereby, the accused have been convicted under section 307 read with section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R/i of 10 years with a fine of Rs. 3,000/-, in default, further S/i for six months. Appellants-accused have also been convicted under sec. 135 (1) of the BP Act and sentenced to undergo S/i for four months with a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to undergo further S/i for 15 days. Accused no. 1 is also convicted for the offence punishable under sec. 294 (b) of IPC and sentenced to undergo S/i for one month. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

(3.) IT was contended by learned Senior advocate Mr. YS Lakhani that the evidence of complainant was not supported by any independent witness in view of the fact that PW-7girishbhai Revabhai Maheria Ex. 27 claimed to be the eye witness,has not supported the case of the prosecution and other eye witness Dilipbhai is not examined by the prosecution and, therefore, conviction imposed upon the appellants-accused by the Sessions Court is only on the evidence of complainant.