A.J. DESAI, J

1. Challenged in this Appeal is the judgment and order dated 13.1.2006, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.10, Nadiad, in Sessions Case No. 250 of 2004, by which the appellant, who is original accused No.1, has been convicted for the offences under Section-302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced him for rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. The brief facts that emerge in the present appeal are as under:

That one Chandubaben Pravinsinh Rana, widow of Pravinsinh Abhesinh Rana, lodged a complaint on 31.7.2004 with Tarapur Police Station, Taluka Khambhat, District- Nadiad and alleged that her husband had expired prior to four years and she was residing with her two sons and four daughters. Out of two sons, one was married and out of four daughters, two were married and were residing at their matrimonial home. She had her agricultural land, which was being cultivated by her sons. Her agricultural land was situated in the sim of village Khanpur. Adjacent to her land, the land of her brother-in-law Jibawabhai Abhesinh Rana is situated.

2.2 On 31.7.2004, her son, who was unmarried, namely, Jaydipsinh, had gone to her field for agricultural purposes. He returned to home at about 6.30 in the evening and at that time she along with her unmarried daughters was present at her residence. Jaydipsinh informed her that his uncle Jibawabhai Abhesinh Rana and his son Sanjaybhai Jibawabhai Rana had broken the water channel (palla), which was situated between the two fields. Pursuant to the mischief committed by Jibawabhai and his son Sanjaybhai, altercation took place at the field. Thereafter, when her son Jaydipsinh came out of his house, she heard some altercation, which was going on out side of the house and, therefore, along with her two daughters, she came out of her house and found that her brother-in-law along with her son were quarreling with Jaydipsinh and Sanjaybhai had a gun in his hand. Her son Jaydipsinh asked Sanjay that he can do whatever he wants to. Because of the quarrel, Sanjay got excited and fired a gun shot on the chest of her son Jaydipsinh. Pursuant to which, he immediately fell down and within few moments, he died on the spot. After this incident, her brother-in-law Jibawabhai and his son Sanjaybhai went back to their home. Pursuant to this First Information Report, the police personnel started investigation and after having found sufficient material against the accused persons, filed a charge sheet in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Khambhat, who, in turn, committed the case in the court of Sessions, Kheda at Nadiad. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges against Sanjaybhai Jibawabhai Rana and Jibawabhai Abhesinh Rana for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the IPC as well as framed charge under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act against accused accused No.1. The prosecution was successful in establishing the case only against original accused No.1 i.e. Sanjaybhai Jibawabhai Rana, but failed in establishing the case, qua, original accused No.2–Jibawabhai Abhesinh Rana, who was charged under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the IPC. As stated here-in-above, the learned Sessions Judge after considering the evidence led by the prosecution in the form of oral testimony as well as documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the original accused No.1 Sanjaybhai Jibawabhai Rana had committed the offence under Section 302 as well as under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and convicted for the same and sentenced him, as stated above. We are informed by learned APP Mr. Neeraj B Soni that the State has not preferred any appeal against the acquittal order of original accused No.2 - Jibawabhai Abhesinh Rana.

3. Mr. J.M. Panchal, learned Advocate for the appellant has assailed the judgment of the Trial Court on various