Point of Law: where a large number of accused alleged to have participated in the incident and several persons have seen the incident, it would not be unreasonable or irrational to adopt the test that conviction can be sustained only if it is supported by atleast two or more witnesses and that too found to be trustworthy in a particular case

JUDGMENT :

A.J. DESAI, J.

1. By way of present Criminal Appeals under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellants herein – original accused have challenged the judgment and award dated 12.02.2016 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No.294/2001, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 224, 225, 302, 307, 324, 325, 326, 332, 333, 397 and 398 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 147 of the IPC with fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 10 days; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 4 months; rigorous imprisonment of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 224 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 4 months; rigorous imprisonment of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 225 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 4 months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 332 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 333 read with Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 397 read with Section 149 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 398 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Criminal Appeal came to be admitted on 15.06.2016 and Criminal Appeal No.739/2016 came to be admitted on 04.07.2016. Record and Proceedings were sent by the trial Court alongwith the paper-book.

2. In all 10 persons were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 332, 333, 324, 325, 326, 224, 225, 397 and 398 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No.294/2001. During the pendency of trial, accused No.5 – Vikrambhai Bhagubhai Patgir and accused No.9 – Harjit Pithabhai Helaiya expired and therefore, the trial proceeded against rest of the 8 accused. On the date of judgment, accused No.3 – Khodubhai Babubhai Khuman had also died. Hence, three different appeals came to be preferred i.e. Criminal Appeal No.609/2016 came to be filed by (1) Bhabhlu Naajbhai Dhadhal, (2) Valkubhai Rambhai Lunsar, (3) Chhaganbhai K