JUDGEMENT :

S.S. SHINDE, J.

1. This appeal challenges the judgment and order passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pune dated 20th December, 2002, in Sessions Case No.192 of 2001, thereby acquitting the Respondents – accused for the charges under sections 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 37(1), 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. The prosecution case in brief is as under:

The complainant Ramesh Belaram Ahuja was running a lottery centre at Pune. On 2.2.2001, in the evening at 4.30pm, 10 to 15 persons alongwith accused No.1 Suresh Rupija came to his shop to collect Gujarat Earthquake Relief Fund. At that time, some altercation took place between the complainant and accused No.1 Suresh and complainant uttered the words addressing the accused ‘not to bark like a dog’. Therefore, accused Suresh asked his companions not to take contribution from the complainant and accordingly, they went away.

Thereafter, on 15.2.2001, at about 9.30pm, the complainant after closing his shop, was proceeding towards his house on his motor cycle on Tilak Road when near a furniture shop, a rickshaw came from behind and someone from that rickshaw, entangled a stick in the front wheel of his motor cycle and another person gave him a push due to which the complainant fell down on the road alongwith the vehicle. Suresh Rupija and his friend Ganesh Misal came there and started abusing him. Suresh reminded the complainant of his words to him -‘a dog’, and started assaulting him by giving him blows by knife. Ganesh Misal gave a blow of chopper on him. Complainant Ramesh started running towards his shop, however, the accused chased him. When the complainant started shouting, the accused ran away. Because of the blows, the complainant sustained bleeding injuries. In the meantime, one person Nikhil Gathani stopped his car on the road and admitted the complainant in Harjeevan hospital. Police came to the hospital and recorded his statement at about 1am on 16.2.2001. On the basis of the said statement, offence was registered at C.R. No.65 of 2001 with Swargate Police Station against accused Nos.1 and 2 under sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

On completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted before the learned JMFC, Court No.8, Pune, however, as the case was triable by Sessions Court, it was committed to the Sessions Court, Pune.

Charge under section 307 and 34 of Indian Penal Code under section 37(1), 135 of Bombay Police Act was framed to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. After completion of a full fledged trial, the Sessions Court acquitted accused and hence, this Appeal by the State.

3. Learned APP appearing for the Appellate – State submits that the evidence of the complainant, who is the injured witness, inspired full confidence. He has stated in his evidence that there was motive behind the said incident. It is submitted that during the course of investigation, incriminating material has been collected. The evidence of the first informant gets corroboration from the medical evidence and other evidence on record. Therefore, the learned APP submitted that the appeal may be allowed.

4. On the other hand, Mr.Shivarkar, learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3, invited the attention of this Court to the findings recorded by the trial Court and submitted that the trial Court has taken a plausible view. Hence, the appeal may be dismissed.

5. The prosecution had examined as many as 12 witnesses. PW1 Ramesh Ahuja is the complainant; one Nikhil Ramesh Gathani as PW2; Sangita Ramesh Ahuja, wife of the PW1 complainant, as PW3; Dr.Manohar Sheth as PW4; panch witnesses Mahadeo Kadu as PW5; Kisan Namdeo Samare as PW6; Sunil Kaluram Pawar as PW7; Ashok Maruti Torambe as PW8; Balasaheb Nathoba Ghate as PW9 and Sandip Yashwant Shinde as PW10; PSI Sou. Pratibha Sanjiv Joshi as PW11, who is the Investigating Officer and PI Baburao Dhondiba Patil as PW12.

6. We have given due consideration to the riv