Point of law: It is not the duty of the appellate court when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial court expression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice

JUDGMENT :

A.C. RAO, J.

Since these three captioned Appeals were arising out of self-same judgment passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat (hereinafter referred to as the trial court) in the Sessions Case No.183 of 2013 dated 26.11.2014, they were heard analogously, and are being disposed of by this Common Judgment and Order.

2. The Criminal Appeal No.255 of 2015 is filed at the instance of the accused Nos.1 and 3 challenging the order of conviction passed by the trial Court, the Criminal Appeal No.1465 of 2014 is filed by the complainant challenging the order of acquittal of accused Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6, whereas, the Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2015 is filed by the State challenging the acquittal of accused Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6. However, neither the complainant nor the State of Gujarat has challenged the order of acquittal for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 201, 188 and 120-B of IPC passed in favour of the appellant - original accused No. 1 and under Sections 324, 201, 188, 120-B of IPC passed in favour of the appellant - original accused No.3.

3. These appeals are at the instance of the appellants – original accused, complainant and the State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) questioning the judgement and order dated 26.11.2014, passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, in the Sessions Case No.183 of 2013, whereby, the trial court had imposed the following sentences upon the accused persons :

[i] The trial court convicted accused No.1 - Anand Jamrala for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.

[ii] The trial court also convicted accused No.3 - Dhaval alias Dhaval Mansukhbhai for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 143, 147, 148 r/w. 149 IPC.

[iii] The trial court acquitted accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 201, 188 and 120-B of IPC.

[iv] The trial court acquitted accused No.3 for the offence under Sections 324,201, 188, 120-B of IPC.

[v] The trial court sentenced both the accused to suffer R.I for life and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I for 6 months for the offence under Section 302 of IPC.

[vi] The trial court sentenced both the accused for the offence under Section 143 of IPC to suffer R.I for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.3000/-, in default, to suffer R.I for one month.

[vii] The trial court sentenced both the accused for the offence under Section 147 of IPC to suffer R.I for 2 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I for 2 months.

[viii] The trial court sentenced both the accused for the offence under Section 148 of IPC to suffer R.I for 2 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I for 2 months.

[ix] The trial court sentenced both the accused for the offence under Section 149 of IPC to suffer R.I for 2 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I for 2 months.

All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

[x] The trial court on appreciation of evidence acquitted the original accused No.2 - Jignesh alias Jigo Jerambhai, accused No.4 - Rameshbhai alias Ramesh Narsingbhai, Accused No.5 - Dineshbhai alias Sahil Mohanbhai, Accused No.6 - Niteshbhai Shrisonilal from all the offences with which they were charged.

4. The short facts leading to filing of present Appeals are in nut-sheet as under:-

4.1 The case in brief relates to the so-called harassment by accused No.3 to the prosecution witness Bhargav on account of demand of mobile of Apple Company. That, Raju Devabhai informed the deceased Lalabhai about harassment being caused by accused No.3 Dhaval to his friend Chetan's friend Bhargav on account of Apple Mobile. This communication took place on 31.10.2012 at about 7.00 p.m. Thus, inquiry about Dhaval came to be made and the deceased Lalabhai informed Chetanbhai to call Bhargav near Gajera Circle. Chetan was directed to come with Bhargav near Gajera Circle. Dhaval was contac