JUDGMENT

The victim of the crime stands believed in so far as the appellant is concerned, not only by the trial Court but the High Court too, to the effect that he initiated the occurrence and the dagger blow given by him cut off the right wrist of the victim. In the incident, the victim suffered seven more injuries and the spread out as such was shared by the appellant as also A-2 and A-8. These three assailants were part of the ten who otherwise were present and played their respective parts in commission of the crime.

2. The trial Court considered that the evidence of the victim needed to be scrutinised closely because the motive the crime was political rivalry; the side of the accused being of the Marxist party. By a process of reasoning, the trial Court disbelieved Pw-2, PW-4 and PW-5, the eye-witnesses of the crime, but finally tilted, in accepting the evidence of the victim, and loaded the appellant with a presumption that he had caused to the victim all the eight injuries; the other accused having been added because of political rivalry. It is on that basis that the appellant was convicted under S. 307, IPC and sentenced to five years R.I.

3. In the Court of Session, the appel