IMPORTANT POINT
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in eyewitness testimony, emphasizing the need for corroboration in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT :

MUNNURI LAXMAN, J.

1. The present appeal assails the judgment of acquittal dated 23.09.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bhilwara on the file of Sessions Case No. 30/2001, therein and thereby, the respondents-Ujjawal @ Kalu and Mohan Lal were acquitted of the charges under Sections 302, 323, 324, 120-B of IPC and under Section 302/34, 323, 324/34, 120-B of IPC respectively.

2. The present appeal is at the instance of the State.

3. For the convenience, accused-Ujjawal @ Kalu is referred as A-1 and accused-Mohan Lal is referred as A-2, who are the respondents in the present appeal.

4. The case of the prosecution is that Mohsin Khan (PW-2) and Sandeep Mehta (PW-9) were friends. On 31.03.2001, Sandeep Mehta parked his cycle near the Dairy Booth of Chandra Shekhar Aazad Nagar of Bhilwara. At 7 pm when they came back to the place of parking, they found that the cycle was punctured with nails. The complainant-Mohsin Khan (PW-2) suspected the role of Ujjawal @ Kalu (A-1) and Narayan Gurjar (absconder), who were sitting by the side of the cycle. In this regard, there was an exchange of heated words and a fight broke out. They allegedly assaulted. Meanwhile, Sazid (deceased), Sakir (PW-7), who is brother of the deceased, and Abhishek (PW-10) were passing through the place of incident and other persons Aslam (PW-3) and one Rajan were also passing through the place of incident. On seeing A-1 and Narayan assaulting Mohsin Khan and Sandeep Mehta, Sazid allegedly tried to interfere. In the meanwhile, A-1 allegedly went to his home and brought knife and stabbed Sazid (deceased) beneath the ribs. A-2, who was holding sword in his hand, also caused the sword injury to the deceased. Immediately, Sakir (PW-7) with the help of Rajan shifted the deceased to hospital on the motorcycle of Rajan. Mohsin Khan (PW-2), who also suffered injuries in the incident, lodged the report under Exhibit-P/5. Basing on the Exhibit-P/5, the FIR No. 107/2001 was registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara under Exhibit-P/20 for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307 of IPC.

5. The statement of the deceased was recorded. The deceased while undergoing treatment succumbed to the injuries in the midnight of 11/12.04.2001. After the deceased died, the offences were altered to Section 302, 323, 324, 120-B of IPC. Subsequently, inquest was held on the dead body and the scene of offence was examined. The postmortem was conducted. Basing on the statement of the deceased, A-1 and A-2 were arrested. On the disclosure statement of A-1 under Exhibit-P/24, knife was seized from his house under Exhibit-P/12 and on the basis of disclosure statement of A-2 under Exhibit-P/27, sword under Exhibit-P/8 was recovered. The police also seized the shirt of the deceased under Exhibit-P/6. Subsequently, accused were remanded to judicial custody. The sword and knife seized from A-1 were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Subsequently, a chargesheet was filed against A-1 and A-2 for the offences under Sections 302, 323, 341, 324, 120-B of IPC and accused Narayan was declared as absconder. On committal, the Sessions Judge has taken the cognizance against A-1 and A-2 for the offences under Sections 302, 323, 324, 120-B of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC. Charges were also framed for the said offences against both the accused.

6. The prosecution in support of its case examined at all 25 witnesses and exhibited documents Exhibit-P/1 to P/31. In defence, accused did not examine oral evidence but exhibited documents Exhibit-D/1 to D/3.

7. The trial court on appreciation of evidence on record found that no offence is made out against both the accused. Consequently, they were acquitted of the said charges. Hence, the present appeal by the State.

8. Heard learned Additional Government Counsel-cum-AAG appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

9. The learned Additional Government Counsel-cum-AAG has vehemently submitted that