1. Heard learned counsel Ms. Haidari for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Thakre for the respondent State.

2. This appeal is coming up for final hearing after 16 years of filing of the appeal. The incident had taken place in the year 1987. As such the appeal is being decided after about 28 years of the date of incident.

3. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to suffer R.I. for six months. The appellant was in custody from 11th February, 1998 till 30th August, 1998. The learned trial Court has directed that set off be given to the appellant for the period already undergone by him. The appellant was accused no.2. He was charge-sheeted along with accused Nos.1 and 3 for the offence punishable under Section 307 of I.P.C.

4. The incident in question had occurred at Teka Naka, Nagpur. The PW-2 - Trilochan Kedarnath Dubey was running a small hotel at Teka Naka, near a country liquor shop. His wife, PW-1-Kalawatibai was assisting him in the said business. The appellant was regularly visiting the shop of PW-1 and 2 and therefore, he was known to them. It is on 28th January, 1987 at about 8.15 p.m. that the appellant accompanied by accused Nos.1 and 3 had purchased eggs and wadas from the shop of PW-2. He, however, refused to pay the price and started abusing the PW-2. He went to the extent of taking out a knife and stabbing PW-2 in his abdomen. After the incident of stabbing, the appellant and his associates ran way from the spot. A severe injury was caused to PW-1. His intestine came out. He was removed to the Hospital. The F.I.R. was registered on the statement of PW-1 Kalawatibai for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.

4A. During the course of investigation, appellant and accused Nos.1 and 3 were arrested and their clothes were seized. During the course of further investigation, statement of PW-2 also was recorded. The statements of some other eye witnesses were also recorded. Spot panchnama was drawn. Articles seized during the course of investigation were sent to Chemical Analyzer. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant and accused Nos.1 and 3.

5. The learned trial Court framed a charge for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the appellant and accused Nos.1 and 3 vide Exh.9. All of them pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined in all 13 witnesses. PW-1 is the wife of the injured. PW-2 is the injured himself. PW-3 is the Panch Witness. PW-4 is the Medical Officer who had examined the injured at Meyo Hospital. PW-5 had seen the PW-2 in injured condition. PW-6 was also the Panch Witness. PW-7 was present when clothes of two of the accused were seized by the Police at Police Station. PW-8 was on duty at Meyo Hospital. He has stated that statement of injured was recorded by the Head Constable Ramlal after obtaining medical certificate of fitness. PW-9 was working in the liquor shop adjoining the shop of PW-2. PW-10 was running a pan shop near the shop of PW-2. This witness has not supported the prosecution case and was declared hostile. PW-11 is also a Panch Witness. He has also not supported the prosecution case. PW-12 was attached to Panchpaoli Police Station as Police Inspector. He had received information from Meyo Hospital that PW-2 had been assaulted by some persons and he was admitted in the Hospital and PW-13 is the Medical Officer who had examined the PW-2 and had operated him.

7. Most of the Panch Witnesses and eye witness have not supported the prosecution case. The prosecution case is mainly based on evidence of PW-1, 2, 4 and 13. PW-2 has stated in his evidence that the appellant had visited his shop and had refused to pay for