B.N. KARIA, J.

The present Appeal preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30th August 1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Sessions Case No. 5 of 1993 recording acquittal of the respondent-Kantibhai Khetabhai Harijan of the offence punishable under Section 302 & 324 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this case are that the complainant Ranchhodbhai Parmabhai Harijan Bhangi resides at Chadiyana, Taluka: Santalpur and earns his bread by doing labour work. The complainant has three brothers, wherein the complainant is the eldest and Shankar is younger than him, and Ganesh is younger than the former. Shankar has been living with his family at Sundarpuri, Gandhidham for the last ten years and Ganesh serves as a sweeper in the military at Vadodara. Brother of the complainant-Shankar lives at Sundarpuri, Gandhidham and the accused of this case Harijan Bhangi Kanti Kheta of Bholot village Taluka-Radhanpur also lives at Gandhidham. Therefore, Manju, daughter of the brother of the complainant Shankar and the accused Kanti Kheta had illicit relations. Before 10 months of lodging the complaint, brother of the complainant Shankarbhai came from Gandhidham and met complainant and discussed about illicit relations between Manju and the accused. He told him to keep Manju with him, and therefore the complainant went to Gandhidham and brought his niece Manju and kept her in his house. Thereafter, the accused Kanti Kheta arrived at complaints home to meet Manju, but seeing the complainant, he left without meeting Manju. The complainant telegraphed his brother and called him at his home and told that the accused Kanti Kheta use to frequently visit his home to meet Manju and therefore he apprehends that he [Kanti Kheta] may kidnap Manju, and therefore, we should gather the people of our community and keep a watch. Thereafter, complainant called the persons of his community at his home mainly; Harijan Bhangi Chaman Gulab, residing at Radhanpur; Mapha Magha; Mapha Okha; Mana Sava and Lavji Ghuda, etc,. The complainant and his brother told them that the accused Kanti Kheta frequently comes to meet their daughter Manju and does not obey them, so please make arrangements for him. Therefore, the leaders made an arrangement and prepared a written document that Kanti Kheta shall not come to meet daughter of Shankarbhai. Thereafter, they got daughter of the complainant Manju married with Harijan Bhangi Jetha Chhagan of Vanod village in the Ashadh month before lodging of the complaint. At the time of incident, Manju was at complainant's home.

3. On 19th September 2002, after taking dinner, the complainant and his wife Mena, their son Paso and his niece Manju were sleeping in the verandas of their house. On that night, at about 01:00 hours, niece of the complainant Manju shouted as ‘Save….Save’, therefore the complainant and his wife Menaben suddenly woke up and saw that the accused Kanti Kheta was armed with a knife. Therefore, the complainant ran and went towards the accused Kanti. The accused inflicted knife blow on the left hand wrist of the complainant and as the complainant was injured, he fell down and sustained injury on his legs and at that time, accused Kanti fled away from the scene of occurrence. Thereafter, when the complainant saw his niece Manju, she was lying profusely bleeding near the cot. Therefore, as the complainant began to shout, the witnesses Thakor Hirabhai Vajabhai; Thakor Karshanbhai Rugnathbhai; Thakor Pababhai Ambabhai and Thakor Chothabhai Nagjibhai etc, arrived. When the complainant asked his niece Manju, she said that when she was sleeping in the cot, accused Kanti Kheta came near her