JUDGMENT :

K.S. Jhaveri, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.01.1994 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.17 of 1991 whereby, the respondents, original accused, were acquitted of all the charges framed against them.

2. The facts in brief giving rise to the filing of present appeal are as under; On 01.09.1989 when complainant as well as his father were going towards their field for agricultural purpose, all the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly with a view to kill rushed there. Accused No.1 gave scythe blow in the head as well as neck of complainant's father. Accused No.2 and 3 also gave such deadly blows to the complainant's father. At that time, complainant and his friends Aniruddhsinh and Vanrajsinh came to complainant's help, but, accused No.5 gave scythe blow to complainant's friend Aniruddhsinh in his right hand and accused No.4 gave scissor blow on the knee of the left leg of Vanrajsinh and they all fell down. By causing deadly injuries, all the accused ran away.

2.1 A complaint in respect of the aforesaid incident was registered with Detroj Police Station. Necessary investigation was done and the accused came to be arrested. At the end of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused before the trial Court. However, since it was a sessions triable offence, the case was committed to Sessions Court and trial was initiated.

3. During the trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses;

4. The prosecution had also produced and relied upon several documentary evidence, particularly, the complaint, Panchnamas, Medical Certificates, F.S.L. Report and such other documentary evidences.

5. At the end of trial, the Court below recorded further statement of accused under section 313 of Cr.P.C. and thereafter, passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal, which has led to the filing of present appeal.

6. Mr. L.R. Poojari, learned APP, submitted that the Court below committed serious error in law and on facts in passing the impugned judgment. He has referred the evidence of Ramjibhai Sandhabhai who is a Panch witness and witness of Rameshbhai Harjibhai, Exh.33 and submitted that the Court below has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and was not justified in passing the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.

7. He has relied upon the judgment in the case of State of U.P. v. Naresh & Ors., reported in 2011 CRI. L.J., particularly on paragraphs No.23, 24 and 25, which read as under:

"23. The High Court has disbelieved Balak Ram (PW.5), who had suffered the gun shot injuries. His evidence could not have been brushed aside by the High Court without assigning cogent reasons. Mere contradictions on trivial matters could not render his deposition untrustworthy.

The evidence of an injured witness must be given due weightage being a stamped witness, thus, his presence cannot be doubted. His statement is generally considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustaine