RAJU SUGNOMAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a judgment and order rendered by the Sessions Court, Junagadh, in Sessions Case No. 79/1997, on 24th October, 2002. 1. 1 The appellants were accused before the trial Court, who were charged to have committed murder of one Deepak Vashrambhai Baria, in furtherance of their common object shared by all of them with two unidentified assailants on 23rd December, 1996 at about 12. 30 P. M. , on the railway platform of Junagadh Railway Station. They all were alleged to have been armed with deadly weapons, like sword, knife, iron pipe, iron rod and iron pestle In this transaction, it is alleged that, they injured Kalubhai Vashram, brother of the deceased. As per the prosecution case, there was a dispute inter se between the complainant side and the accused side on 20th October, 1996, in respect of which, the accused side had lodged an FIR with the police and while on bail, the complainant side was required to mark their presence every week. It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of the incident, i. e. 23th December, 1996, the complainant side had gone to Junagadh for marking their presence before the police and after marking presence, they went to the Railway Station for catching the train. While they were waiting outside the Waiting-Room, the accused persons with two unidentified persons rushed to the spot. They all were armed with weapons as narrated above and committed assault. In the assault, Kalubhai Vashram (PW. 3) suffered injury. Deceased Deepak was done to death. He had sustained as many as nine injuries on his person. Thereafter the assailants fled away. However, on hearing the commotion, two police witnesses, viz. PW. 7 Batukbhai and PW. 23 Ratilal, rushed to the spot and Batukbhai was successful in apprehending accused No. 6 Lachhu Gagandas. PW. 3 lodged FIR with police, on the basis of which, offence was registered and investigated. Having found sufficient evidence, the police lodged charge sheet in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh, who, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions and Session Case No. 79/1995 came to be registered.

(2.) THE trial Court, initially, framed charge at Exh. 1, which was then altered to charge at Exh. 15. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. The evidence was led by the prosecution and the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution was successful in establishing the charges against the appellants and convicted the accused-appellants for the offences punishable under Section 302 r. w. section 149, section 307 r. w. section 149, section 143 r. w. section 149, section 144 r. w. section 149, section 147 r. w. section 149 and section 148 r. w. section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them as under : r. I for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default R. I for one month, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r. w. section 149 IPC. R. I for seven years and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R. I for seven days, for the offence punishable under Section 307 r. w. section 149 IPC. R. I for one month and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R. I for seven days, for the offence punishable under Section 143 r. w. section 149 IPC. R. I for six months and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R. I for seven days, for the offence punishable under Section 144 r. w. section 149 IPC. R. I for one month and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R. I for seven days, for the offence punishable under Section 147 r. w. section 149 IPC. R. I for one month and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R. I for seven days, for the offence punishable under Section 148 r. w. section 149 IPC. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) HEARD learned advocate Mr. J. V. Bhairavia appearing for the appellants in both the appeals, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati for the State.