Point in Issue :
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case trial Court judgment of acquittal of respondent is just and proper.

K.S. Jhaveri, J.—By way of this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant State has challenged the judgement and order of acquittal dated 16.9.1992 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Sessions Case No. 156 of 1991 whereby learned trial Judge has given benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted them of the charges under Sections 302, 337, 506(2) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

1. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, is that the accused and deceased Mafaji Shivaji are real brothers. The complainant of this case is father of the accused and deceased person. An enmity was going on among the brothers for a long time. In the past, deceased Mafaji Shivaji had chopped off hand of accused No. 2. On 19.8.1991 in the morning at 10 O’clock there was a quarrel between the accused and deceased Mafaji Shivaji and thereafter both the accused persons gathered and formed an intention to commit murder of the deceased. Accused No. 1 inflicted three to four fatal blows on Mafaji Shivaji with scythe due to which he had died on the spot. At the same time, accused No. 2 caused injuries on the deceased by hitting him with stone. A complaint in that regard was filed. Thereafter, investigation was carried out on the basis of the complaint. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate. As the case was triable by Sessions Court, it was committed to the Sessions Court.

3. The trial Court framed charges against the accused persons. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution produced evidence. Further statements of the accused persons were recorded. The trial Court, after completion of trial, acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against them by the aforesaid judgement. Hence the present appeal.

4. To prove the case against the accused, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:

1. Complainant, Shivaji Nathaji at Exh. 25

2. Bhikhaji Fataji at Exh. 27

3. Bhavansinh Shivsinh at Exh. 28

4. Police Constable Vikramsinh at Exh. 30

5. Dr. Vikram Kantibhai at Exh. 34

6. Jalamsinh Pujaji at Exh. 36

7. Melaji Pratapji at Exh. 37

8. Amarsinh Udaji at Exh. 38

9. Galabji Dhulaji at Exh. 39

10. Galabji Bhavanji at Exh. 40

11. Shivaji Fataji at Exh. 41

4.1 According to the prosecution, all the witnesses are eye witnesses. Deposition of Investigating Officer P.I. Ahir has been recorded at Exh. 42.

4.2 The prosecution has relied on the following documentary evidences:

1 Panchnamas at Exhs. 10, 12, 13, 17, 18 & 29

2. F.S.L. Report of Exhibit-11

produced at Exh. 26

3. Postmortem report at Exh. 35

4. Dispatch note at Exh. 18

4.3 Learned APP Ms. Shah, appearing for the appellant- State has submitted that the trial Court has committed error in acquitting the respondents-original accused of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 337, 506(2) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. She further submitted that the trial Court has failed to appreciate that the evidences of the eye witnesses get corroboration with the medical evidence. In that view of the matter, she submitted that the order of acquittal is required to be set aside and the accused are required to be convicted.

5. At the outset it is required to be noted that the principles which would govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court, against an order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, have been very succinctly explained by the Apex Court in a catena of decisions. In the case of M.S. Narayana Menon @ Mani vs. State of Kerala & Anr, reported in (2006) 6 SCC 39, the Apex Court has narrated about the powers of the High Court in appeal against the order of acquittal. In para 54 of the decision, the Apex Court has observed as under:

“In any event