STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KOLI MANSUKH LALJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State is in appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgement and order of acquittal dated 30.12.1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar in Sessions Case No. 100 of 1993. By the judgement under challenge, the respondent who was tried for offences under Section 302, IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 was acquitted.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, the incident in question has been narrated by the complainant - Kantaben, who is the mother of the deceased Rasila, aged 10, alleged to have been done to death by the accused - Mansukh by inflicting two blows on her head with a sword. The case as per the prosecution is that when Chakuben - daughter of complainant, on the previous day of the alleged incident, had gone to fetch water from the hand pump at the panchayat, the accused Mansukh teased her near his house which was near the hand pump. On the day of the incident Chaku narrated the same to Kantaben, who thereafter went to the accused Mansukh's house and admonished him to keep off from teasing her daughter Chaku. Mansukh was present at his house with his mother and reportedly at being reprimanded by Kantaben, he became agitated. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter on the complainant's returning home, her younger daughter Rasila went to her relative's place to sit on the swing and Chaku and the complainant had resumed their household chores. It is the case of the prosecution that at around 10.30 am the complainant heard Rasila scream and therefore she and Chaku went towards Savji Jivan's house where she saw Mansukh running away with a blood stained sword. Rasila was lying on the floor in a pool of blood. The deceased was taken to hospital but could not be saved and succumbed to her injuries.

(3.) Ms. Nisha Thakore, learned APP appearing for respondent State after having taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence submitted that the trial court committed an error in acquitting the respondent - accused. It was contended by Ms. Thakore, that the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution. She submitted that the trial court ought to have considered that there was a motive for the alleged offence committed by the accused and that the trial court has erred in discarding the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses merely on the ground of minor variations and also in not believing the child witness.