CR.A/1325/1986 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1325 of 1986 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== STATE OF GUJARAT Versus PATEL CHAGAN KALA ====================================== Appearance : Mr IM Pandya, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Appellant MR G RAMAKRISHNAN for Opponent(s) : 1, ====================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT Date : 08/07/2008 CR.A/1325/1986 2/3 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD) The present appeal is filed by the State against the decision of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal in Sessions Case No.19 of 1986 dated 3rd July 1986 whereby the accused – appellant was tried by the Sessions Court for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code. After considering the prosecution case, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the offence as alleged is not made out and acquitted the accused. The deceased had sustained a solitary injury of the dimention as given below: “A CLW C­5 cms deep stab wound seen at the inner aspect of Rt. thigh at mid thigh about 10­15 cm below Rt. hip inequenal region seen after removal of stiches – obliquely situated 2 cm in lengh 1 cm in breadth 5 cm deep” The case of the prosecution was that when the deceased along with two others were riding on bicycle and going, at that time, accused stabbed the deceased with knife on the right thigh. The motive of inflicting the injury on the deceased was that accused suspected that the deceased was having illicit relations with one Kunwarben. The trial court, after considering the evidence, did not believe the motive and observed that the injury itself cannot be believed to have been caused with an intention as alleged by the prosecution. CR.A/1325/1986 3/3 JUDGMENT We have considered the argument of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the accused has stabbed the victim with a knife on right inner thigh. The accused has been attributed with this injury and when this injury having resulted into excessive bleeding and the prosecution case stands established. We have examined the record and have doubts about the veracity of the testimony of the prosecution because if the accused has intention of killing the deceased, a vulnerable part was always available to be hit by knife. The seat of the injury, that is, inner part of the thigh would not have been available exposed and accessible for being assaulted. In this background, the defence of the accused person that while two persons were being carried on the bicycle the deceased fell down from the bicycle and in that process sustained the injury, which is not a clear clean cut wound. It is a kind of wound which can be said to have been caused from some non­clean object which might have been got inserted. In that background, the theory of the defence that it was some part of the bicycle which hit the accused cannot be ruled out. Accordingly, the stand of the accused stands probablized. We do not think we can find any perversity in the findings. As the requirement in law for interference is that as and when the interference is made in the appeal against acquittal the unreasonableness and perversity of the judgment is to be looked into. We find that the judgment of the trial Court is proper in law. Hence, the State appeal is dismissed. (Bhagwati Prasad, J.) (S.R.Brahmbhatt, J.) *mohd