( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment rendered in Sessions case No. 39 of 1982 on 23-12-1982 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Junagadh. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as under:

( 2 ) THE appellants-original accused had gone for girnar parikrma on 7-11-1981. Vitthal Govind P. W. 1 Ex. 10 head constable and three other police constables were on duty.

( 3 ) THE accused were near Ahmedabadi kua near Jenababa Medi on 9 at about 3. 30 p. m. Thousands of pilgrims were also there. Accused No. 6 was a wanted accused as he was to be arrested because of the fact that C. R. No. 223/79 was pending against him which was filed on 1-1-1979 for offences under secs. 143 147 149 332 336 337 and 504 of the I. P. C That position is also clear because he was shown in absconding register kept at the Police Station. Both these facts are clear from the documents Ex 24 and Ex. 34. Now as Vitthal and other police constables saw these six persons they tried to catch hold of accused No. 6. Accused No. 6 was caught by police constable Lila who is examined as prosecution witness no. 3. The other accused persons namely accused nos. 1 to 5 wanted to see that the accused No. 5 should be released and therefore they started throwing stones. At that time accused no. 6 took out a knife and gave a knife blow to the police constable Lila. Ultimately the accused were successful in getting accused no. 6 freed from police constable Lila and they were also successful thereafter in running away. Immediately thereafter police constable Lila got himself treated and so also head constable Vitthal who was injured by stones. Thereafter the complaint was filed in due course and the same was investigated. Ultimately all the accused persons were charge-sheeted and in due course were committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge after appreciating the evidence led before him came to the conclusion that accused nos. 1 to 5 were guilty for an offence under sec. 307 read with sec. 149 of the I. P. C. and were also guilty for an offence under secs. 143 147 225 and 332 of the I. P. C. Accused No. 6 was held guilty for an offence under secs. 144 148 224 307 and 332 read with sec. 149 I. P. C. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 each one was sentenced to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500. 00i. d. to suffer imprisonment for three months. Accused No. 6 was also sentenced to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500-/ i. d. to suffer R. I. for three months. Accused No. 6 was also held guilty for an offence under sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act but for that offence and for all other offences no separate sentence was awarded against accused no. 6. Accused challenged the conviction and sentence so passed by filing this appeal.

( 4 ) THE prosecution examined Dr. P. T. Kotadia P. W. 2 Ex. 12. In his evidence he has stated that he had examined Vitthal on 9-11-1981 and found the following injuries on his person:1 Contused wound in the middle of the head 2x 1/4x 1/4. 2 Abrasion near the left eye-brow. 3 Abrasion on the palmer side of the left hand. According to him all these injuries were posible by hard substance which had a sharp edge. According to him such injuries were possible by stones having edges. P W 9. Ex. 37 Dr. Arunrai J. Mankad has examined police constable Lila P. W. 3. He states that he had examined him on 9-11-1981 and found the following injuries on his person:1 Incised would 1 1/4x1/4x muscle deep on the left chest between the 3 and 4th ribs. 2 Incised wound 1x1/4x muscle deep on the left hand little finger and the thumb. According to his opinion both these injuries were possible by sharp cutting instrument. Now Vitthal is examined at Ex. 10 and in his evidence he has stated that he was on duty in plain dress from 7-11- 1981 and ultimately on 9-11-1981 he was at the medi of Jenababa. At about 3. 30p. m. he saw six accused coming from opposite direction and he immediately realised