The court emphasized the importance of independent findings by the trial court, the need to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the adoption of the view in favor of the accused when two views are possible.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. The present appeal filed under the provisions of Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.10.2004 of acquittal passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 1), Gandhidham-Kachchh, in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2002.

2. The respondent-accused was charge sheeted and tried for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 447 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”) and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, wherein and whereby at the end of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the accused from the charges levelled against him.

3. The case of the prosecution as per the charge at Exh.1 and the complaint dated 27.10.2000 at Exh.49/C is that on 26.10.2000, on the next day of diwali, at round 5:00 a.m. in the morning, the first informant got up on hearing the noise and found one person in his compound (Varanda), who was his son-in-law and on inquiring from him that how he had come inside, in response, the respondent-accused said “he has crossed the fence” which was behind his house. The daughter of the complainant Liliben along with her minor girl aged about 12 months, who was also sleeping in the compound of the first informant’s house, got up and walked towards the house of his brother-Naranbhai, PW-2. The first informant heard the shouts and rushed out, where he saw the accused was inflicting blows on his daughter Liliben and thereafter, the complainants brother PW-2 came out and caught hold of the accused and after, few scuffle he ran away. Hence, the PW-1 registered an F.I.R. in view of the said incident. The deceased succumbed to the fatal blows, hence the respondent-accused was charged with the aforementioned offences.

4. The learned JMFC, committed the case under the provisions of Section 209 of the Cr.P.C. to the Court of Sessions. At the end of the trial, the accused-respondent was acquitted after evaluating the oral as well as the documentary evidence.

5. The State is in Criminal Appeal assailing the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court.

6. Learned APP Mr. Tirthraj Pandya for the appellant-State has submitted that the impugned judgment of the trial Court at the outset, is required to be quashed and set aside as the trial Court has barely adopted the averments of the written submissions filed on behalf of the respondent-accused and has not applied it’s mind to the evidence.

7. Learned APP has submitted that the medical evidence corroborates with the ocular evidence as the witnesses, who have seen the incident, have categorically stated that number of blows having been inflicted on the deceased and thus, it clearly establishes the complicity of the respondent-accused in the offence.

8. Learned APP has submitted that the relationship between the deceased and the accused was very strained and hence, on the un-fateful morning at 5:00 a.m. of 26.10.2000, in order to take the revenge, the accused committed murder of the daughter of the first informant.

9. Learned APP has referred to the deposition of PW-1, who is the father of the deceased and has stated that his deposition would clearly disclose the presence of the accused in the wee hours of the morning of 27.10.2000, in his house. It is submitted by the learned APP that the accused had crossed and jumped the fence of the house of the complainant and had entered his compound, where the daughter of the complainant was sleeping with her minor daughter and on seeing the accused, she went to the house of the brother of the complainant PW-2 and the accused followed her to the compound and committed murder by inflicting knife blows on the deceased.

10. Learned APP has submitted that PW-2 Naranbhai, who is the brother of the PW-1 on hearing the shouts of PW-1 and the deceased had immediately rushed out from his house and caught hold of the accused, but ultimately the accused ran away from the street and the deceased