- (1.)Heard Mr. Akshat Shrivastava, learned Counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1-State, and Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 to 5. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 18.08.2006 rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in Criminal Appeal No. 270 of 1996 whereby the High Court has set aside the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Sessions Trial No. 182 of 1995.
(2.)The facts which are essential to be stated for disposal of this appeal are: On 06.03.1995, the informant, Jagdish Solanki (PW-6), being accompanied by Sanjay, went on a motor-cycle to Juna Bus Stand in Unhel. While Jagdish was sitting on stationary motor-cycle, Sanjay was talking to one Dayaram. At that juncture, about 10.30 P.M., the accused persons, who had put on shawls, came on a motor-cycle and there was an altercation with the deceased Sanjay, and eventually they took out their weapons, namely, Gupti, Sword and knife and attacked him, as a result of which he sustained serious injuries. The informant lodged an FIR on the same day and as the informant had also sustained injuries, he was sent for medical examination to the Primary Health Centre, Unhel. Be it stated, the deceased while being taken to the hospital breathed his last and, therefore, FIR which was lodged Under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code (Indian Penal Code) and other offences was converted to one Under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and other offences in respect of the accused persons.
(3.)After the criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency recorded the statements of a number of witnesses including Mohammed Shakir (PW-11) who claimed to be the eye witness. In the course of instigation, the blankets, knifes and other weapons were seized. Accused persons were arrested on 07.03.1995. Test identification parade was held on 30.03.1995 in the presence of the Executive Magistrate (PW-5). After completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was placed before the competent court which, in turn, committed the matter to the Court of Session and eventually, it was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.