A.J. Shastri, J.

1. The State has filed present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 30th June 2006 passed in Sessions Case No. 45 of 2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Jamnagar.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 29th August 2004 at about 6:45 p.m. the accused persons had attacked and assaulted one Dayaljibhai Ratanshibhai Chotaliya, the husband of the complainant viz. Narmadaben. The complainant has asserted in the complaint that one Babubhai of Village Ambala had come and informed to the complainant that the husband of the complainant viz. Dayaljibhai was lying in bleeding condition near the Patiya at Village Mavana. On reporting of the said circumstance by Babubhai, complainant Narmadaben as well as Hirabapa had straight way rushed out to the spot in rickshaw of one Nathabhai Narshibhai where the husband of complainant was lying in an injured condition. The injured was immediately taken to the Morbi Government Hospital. However, after giving primary treatment on account of the serious condition was required to be shifted to Rajkot for further treatment where Dayaljibhai was in an unconscious state of mind and therefore, the complainant at the hospital informed the police regarding such commission of crime at Jodia Police Station, which was registered as Cr. No. I-43 of 2004. After registering the offence the crime reported was inquired by Investigating officer Mr. Solanki, who after collecting and taking steps, which are required in investigation has filed the charge-sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jodiya, which was registered as Charge-sheet No. 14/05 and the Criminal Case was then registered as Case No. 69 of 2005. The offence, which was reported was triable by the Court of Sessions in exercise of power under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate was pleased to commit the case to the Sessions Court, which was came for consideration before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, which was then registered as Sessions Case No. 45 of 2005. Upon committal of the case, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has framed the charge at Exh. 7 against the respondent-accused and plea recorded at Exh. 8 and 9. During the passage of time, the main accused Khimjibhai Kacha Chauhan passed away and therefore, the case has become abated qua him. Resultantly, only one accused i.e. Shantilal @ Natho Khimjibhai Kacha Chauhan was tried as accused and subsequent thereof, the plea has been recorded of the respondent accused in which he denied the offence being committed and claimed to be tried.

3. The record further indicates that after the said process of recording of plea, the prosecution has given an opportunity to lead the evidence which had been led before the Court in the form of oral as well as documentary evidence in the following form.

4. After leading the said evidence, closure purshis given by the prosecution. Resultantly, a further statement of respondent-accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. In Section 313 statement also since the offence is denied being committed, the case was then put-up for final adjudication where the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has framed issues. After considering the overall material on record and after appreciating the ocular as well as documentary evidence lead by the prosecution, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 2, vide judgment and order dated 30th June 2006 was pleased to pass an order of acquittal and released the respondent-accused from the charge of 307, 114 of the I.P.C. read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. It is this judgment and order, which is made a subject matter of this criminal appeal.

5. From the record, it appears that the appeal has been admitted on 31st January 2008 and after completion of preparation of paper-book, the same has come-up for final hearing before us, in which the learned APP Ms. Punani