VAGHARI KALA BHIKHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
VAGHARI KALA BHIKHA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment rendered in Sessions case No. 39 of 1982 on 23-12-1982 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Junagadh. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as under:
(2.) The appellants-original accused had gone for girnar parikrma on 7-11-1981. Vitthal Govind P. W. 1 Ex. 10 head constable and three other police constables were on duty.
(3.) The accused were near Ahmedabadi kua near Jenababa Medi on 9 at about 3.30 p.m. Thousands of pilgrims were also there. Accused No. 6 was a wanted accused as he was to be arrested because of the fact that C. R. No. 223/79 was pending against him which was filed on 1-1-1979 for offences under secs. 143 147 149 332 336 337 and 504 of the I. P. C That position is also clear because he was shown in absconding register kept at the Police Station. Both these facts are clear from the documents Ex 24 and Ex. 34. Now as Vitthal and other police constables saw these six persons they tried to catch hold of accused No. 6. Accused No. 6 was caught by police constable Lila who is examined as prosecution witness no. 3. The other accused persons namely accused nos. 1 to 5 wanted to see that the accused No. 5 should be released and therefore they started throwing stones. At that time accused no. 6 took out a knife and gave a knife blow to the police constable Lila. Ultimately the accused were successful in getting accused no. 6 freed from police constable Lila and they were also successful thereafter in running away. Immediately thereafter police constable Lila got himself treated and so also head constable Vitthal who was injured by stones. Thereafter the complaint was filed in due course and the same was investigated. Ultimately all the accused persons were charge-sheeted and in due course were committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge after appreciating the evidence led before him came to the conclusion that accused nos. 1 to 5 were guilty for an offence under sec. 307 read with sec. 149 of the I. P. C. and were also guilty for an offence under secs. 143 147 225 and 332 of the I. P. C. Accused No. 6 was held guilty for an offence under secs. 144 148 224 307 and 332 read with sec. 149 I. P. C. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 each one was sentenced to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00i.d. to suffer imprisonment for three months. Accused No. 6 was also sentenced to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500-/ i.d. to suffer R. I. for three months. Accused No. 6 was also held guilty for an offence under sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act but for that offence and for all other offences no separate sentence was awarded against accused no. 6. Accused challenged the conviction and sentence so passed by filing this appeal.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.