l. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant convict [original accused] [hereafter to be referred to as “the accused”] under Section 374 read with Section 386 of Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 19.2.1991 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad in Sessions Case No. 75 of 1990, whereby the appellant was held guilty of the charge of offences punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. The learned trial Judge convicted the appellant-accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 5,ooo/- and in default of payment of fine, sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment of six months. The judgment is challenged on various grounds mentioned in para-5 of the memo of the appeal. Mr. Nitin Amin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. Amee Yajnik for the appellant has taken us through various grounds of challenge and has submitted that the order of conviction and sentence is not sustainable, more particularly, in the background of the facts and circumstances emerging from the evidence led by the prosecution, and has submitted that the conviction being unwarranted, the accused deserves acquittal.

2. I