A.B. Chaudhari, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30-11-2002 in Sessions Case No. 90/1996 passed by the learned 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli, convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, the present Appeal was filed by the appellant.

2. In support of the Appeal, Shri N.R. Saboo, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the evidence of PW 1-Laxman, the complainant, is totally unbelievable and untrustworthy and should have been rejected at the threshold by the learned Sessions Court. According to him, the solitary testimony of PW 1-Laxman could not have been relied on for basing the conviction for offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He then submitted that the medical evidence is contrary to the ocular testimony of PW 1-Laxman and, therefore, an order of acquittal should have been recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. He further submitted that the offence punishable under section 307, Indian Penal Code is not at all proved by the prosecution which, at the mos