HUSEIN JUMA DAFAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the order of the learned AddI. Session Judge, Junagadh passed in Sessions Case No. 84/84. The present appellant along with one other was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Sections 392, 397, 398, 506(2) of the I.P.C. The facts of the case can be briefly summarized as under: On 15.8.1984, on a train proceeding from Delwada to Junagadh complainant Isamail Ali boarded the last compartment be had some money with him and it is alleged that two accused persons at the point of knife robbed him of Rs. 80/-. In the same compartment prosecution witness Pirmohmed Najar Mohmed, who is a Police Constable was also present. The accused were arrested and arranged before the learned Sessions Judge Junagadh.

(2.) It may be noted that the incident had taken place on a night-train and the accused were not previously known to the complainant. The evidence of the prosecution witness Pirmohmad is to the effect that from some days prior to the incident he was knowing the accused and they had boarded the train. One of the accused had put on a coffee colour pant. This evidence was found acceptable by the learned Judge and he convicted the present appellant. However, he acquitted the other on the ground that he had not taken any actual part, in the robbery. The said order of conviction is being challenged before us in the present appeal.

(3.) Mr. M.M. Jadeja, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-accused urged that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses would not, conclusively establish the identity of the present appellant and in that view of the matter when the learned-trial Judge was pleased to acquit the other accused, there was hardly any reason for convicting the present accused.