Decided on April 13,1979

STATE Respondents


A.N.SURTI - (1.) These two appeals filed by original accused No. 4 (appellant of appeal No. 362 of 1977) and original accused Nos. 2 and 5 (appellants of appeal No. 409 of 1977) are directed against the order of conviction and sentence passed against the said three accused in sessions case No. 7 of 1977 which was decided by the learned Sessions Judge Bulsar at Navsari.
(2.) The learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 19th May 1977 convicted accused Nos. 2 4 and 5 who are the appellants in these two appeals for the offences under secs. 302 and 326 read with sec. 34 of the I. P. Code and sentenced each one of them to undergo R.I. for life in respect of the offence under sec. 302 read with sec. 34 of the Code and to undergo R I. for three years for the offence under sec. 326 read with sec. 34 of the Code. ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
(3.) Mr. G. H. Amin the learned Advocate (appointed) appearing for the appellants submits that in the instant case the learned Sessions Judge has erred in convicting the accused inspite of the fact that there is no cogent reliable and unimpeachable evidence on record establishing the guilt of the accused. The complaint was recorded 15 hours water the incident and it therefore cannot supply corroborative piece of evidence to the evidence of the witnesses. The evidence of the prosecution witnesses and particularly the five eye witnesses that is complainant Bhanuben daughter of the deceased Mangu Makan P.W. 2 Ex 11; Bai Mangi widow of the deceased P.W. 3 Ex. 13; injured Vaghji P.W. 5 Ex. 15; Parvati wife of the injured Vaghji P.W. 6 Ex. 16 and Shanti the mother-in-law of the injured Vaghji P.W. 7 Ex. 17 is full of contradictions does not inspire any confidence and suffers from many infirmities and lastly it is urged by Mr. Amin that in the instant case inspite of the fact that there were injuries on two of the accused persons viz. accused No. 5 Babar Mani and accused No. 4 Chhana Ganda and inspite of the fact that so far as accused No. 5 is concerned his injuries were of a serious nature one of them showing that his index finger was cut off the prosecution witnesses have not only failed to explain these injuries but have gone to the length of denying the same.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.