JUDGMENT :

RAJENDRA M.SAREEN, J.

1. Present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant - State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment and order dated 20/06/1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.302 of 1991 acquitting the respondent - original accused from the offence punishable under sections 307 of Indian Penal Code and under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is as under:-

Unarmed Police Constable Ganpatsinh Fatehsinh Parmar and Ramanbhai Devjibhai attached to Bapunagar Police Station were on patrolling duty on 11/12/1990 near Navi Masjid, Indira Garibnagar area. They were on scooter which was driven by said Ganpatsinh. While they were passing near Navi Masjid, somebody hurt Ramanbhai on his back with knife. As he shouted, Ganpatsinh got down from his scooter and followed the person who caused injury to Ramanbhai. That person was caught by him along with Rampuri knife. On being asked, he disclosed his name as Roshanbhai Fakirbhai Shaikh of Rakhiyal, Ahmedabad. The said accused Roshanbhai was brought by both of them to Bapunagar Police Station and Ramanbhai was sent to Shardaben hospital for having treatment.

FIR was lodged by said Ganpatsinh and offence was registered as CR.No.I-421 of 1990 before the Bapunagar Police station.

3. On the basis of the said complaint, investigation was started, panchnama of the condition of the accused along with the knife and panchnama in respect to blood sustained clothes of the injured were prepared. Panchnama of the scene of offence was drawn. Statements of the injured Ramanbhai and others were recorded. Weapons and clothes were forwarded to FSL for scientific examination After through investigation, as there was sufficient evidence against the respondent - accused, Chargesheet was filed before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad. As the offence committed by the accused was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, as per the provisions of Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code, the learned Judge was pleased to commit the case to the Court of Sessions and the case was transferred and placed for trial in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, which has been numbered as Sessions Case No.302 of 1991. Thereafter, Charge was framed against the accused for the offence punishable under section 307 of Indian Penal Code and under section 135 of Bombay Police Act. The accused pleaded not guilty to the Charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, therefore, laid evidence, oral as well as documentary. After the evidence was over, Further Statement of the respondent - accused was recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and arguments were heard. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit the respondent accused for the charges levelled against him. Hence, the appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred the present Criminal Appeal challenging the judgment and order of acquittal.

4. Heard Ms.C.M. Shah, learned APP for the State and Mr.Pratik Barot, learned advocate for the respondent accused.

5. Ms.C.M. Shah, learned APP for the appellant State has vehemently argued that the Sessions Judge has wrongly acquitted the accused of the offences for which he was charged and the acquittal order is against the law and evidence on record. There is no proper appreciation of evidence done by the trial court. She has further argued that the Sessions Judge has committed a grave error in not believing the deposition of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, more particularly Ganpatsinh and injured Raman, though they have supported the case of the prosecution and evidence adduced by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the Sessions Judge has erred in acquitting the accused from the charges levelled against him. It is further argued that the prosecu