The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence led to the acquittal of one appellant in a robbery attempt case.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in a common judgment in Sessions Case No. 66/2014 and Sessions Case No. 63/2015 on 29.07.2016, whereby, the learned Trial Court has convicted the appellants and other co-accused for the offence punishable under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”).

The appellants are hereinafter referred to as the accused as they stood in the rank and file in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1 That on 27.05.2014, the complainant-Mr. M.D. Champavat, In-charge Police Inspector, SOG, Banaskantha at Palanpur got a secret information that a gang of persons was to move out to commit robbery or dacoity and a watch was to be arranged with the Investigating Officers of the LCB and hence, the complainant and other police personnel went towards Dharewada village ahead of Chhapi as the information was that the gang was to move on the single track road from Ghanwada and Naglasan towards Meloj and then from the kutchha road of Dharewada, they were to go on to the highway. That the team of police personnel went towards Dharewada near the railway crossing where the single track road has fields on the northern side and waste land on the southern side and hid themselves and at around 22.00 hours, they heard the sound of a motorcycle and as the motorcycle came nearby, they put obstacles on the road and halted the motorcycle. That the motorcycle tried to turn and flee and as there were three persons on the motorcycle, it fell down and the motorcycle fell on top of all the three persons. That immediately the police caught all the three persons and there was another bike which was coming with the headlights closed behind the said bike and as soon as the person driving the bike saw that the motorcycle in front was stopped, it switched on the light, turned around and fled away. That the police personnel caught the three persons and enquired from them their names and they were Sharif Nagodar Sindhi (Dafer) residing at Ghanwada, Taluka Siddhpur who was driving the motorcycle bearing registration no. GJ-2-BB-7002 and the pillion riders were Latif Nagodar Sindhi (Dafer) residing at Ghanwada, Taluka Siddhpur and Suleman Jumma Sindhi (Dafer) residing at Ghanwada, Taluka Siddhpur. That they were searched and knives, catapults and stones, mobile phone, battery and screw drivers were found of them. That the complaint was filed by the complainant-Mr. M.D. Champavat, In-charge Police Inspector, SOG, Banaskantha at Palanpur which was registered at Chhapi Police Station being I C.R. No. 25/2014 on 27.05.2014 under Sections 398 and 399 of the IPC. That during investigation, the Investigating Officer found that the persons who had fled on the motorcycle were Hanifbhai Rahimbhai @ Rahmatullah Dafer residing at Ghanwada, Taluka Sidhhpur and Mirkhan Balukhan Sindhi (Dafer) residing at Ghanwada, Taluka Sidhhpur. That the Investigating Officer investigated the offence and the charge-sheet came to be filed before the Sessions Court, Banaskantha at Palanpur against the persons found at the spot i.e. Sharif Nagodar Sindhi (Dafer), Latif Nagodar Sindhi (Dafer) and Suleman Jumma Sindhi (Dafer) which was registered as Sessions Case No. 66/2014. That after the investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against Hanifbhai Rahimbhai @ Rahmatullah Dafer which was registered as Sessions Case No. 63/2015.

2.2. That all the accused were duly served with the summons and all the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and after the procedure under Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was followed, an application came to be filed by the learned APP at Exh.15 t