The reliability of the sole testimony of a witness and the corroboration of testimony with medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

This criminal appeal, preferred under section 374(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.10.1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Almora in Sessions Trial No.13 of 1996, State Vs. Pushkar Gurrani, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant/accused u/s 307 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) and sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for one year.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.

3. In brief, the prosecution case is that complainant Hari Om (P.W.5) lodged an FIR stating therein that on 2.10.1995 at about 9 PM, when he was in his duty at District Hospital, he heard noise that Om 2

Prakash has received injury of knife. On hearing this, he rushed on the spot and saw that injured Om Prakash was lying there and at that time Dr. Dhirendra Bankoti (PW4) and duty staff was present over there. Injured Om Prakash informed the complainant that the appellant-accused Pushkar Gurrani tried to enter inside the ward without any reason and when he refused the appellant-accused, then the appellant-accused gave a knife blow in his stomach and thereafter the appellant ran away from there and after that the injured Om Prakash became unconscious. This incident was also seen by the duty staff present over there. With the same averments, the FIR Ex.Ka-3 was lodged by P.W.5 Hari Om on 2.10.1995 at 9:40 PM at P.S. Kotwali Almora. On the basis of the FIR, Head Constable Naresh Pal prepared the Chik FIR of the case, i.e. Ex.Ka-4. The investigation of this case was entrusted to P.W.6 S.I. Ilam Chand Verma. Injured Om Prakash was medically been examined on 2.10.1995 at 9:00 PM by P.W.4 Dr. Dhirendra Bankoti who after the medical examination, prepared the medical report Ex.Ka-1. Thereafter, the supplementary report of the injured was also been prepared by the same medical officer, i.e. Ex.Ka-2. During the course of investigation the I.O. inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan, which is on record. Ex.Ka-5 is the extract of statement of Dr. Dhirendra Bankoti; Ex.Ka-6 is the extract of statement of Saroj, nurse; Ex.Ka-7 is the extract of statement of Reeta, nurse and Ex.Ka-8 is the extract of statement of Hari Om (complainant), which were recorded by the I.O. The I.O. during the course of investigation recorded the statements of witnesses and after completing the investigation, submitted the charge sheet against the appellant/accused in the court, i.e. Ex.Ka-9.

4. After receiving the charge sheet, learned CJM, Almora committed the case to the court of Sessions on 01.03.1996 after giving necessary copies to the appellant/accused as provided under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5. On 28.9.1996, the learned Sessions Judge, Almora framed the charge against the appellant/ accused Pushkar Gurrani for the offence punishable u/s 307 IPC. The charge was read over and explained to appellant/accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. To prove its case, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 Om Prakash, injured witness, P.W.2 Reeta, P.W.3 Saroj, P.W.4 Dr. Dhirendra Bankoti, who medically examined the injured Om Prakash; P.W.5 Hari Om, complainant and P.W.6 S.I. Ilam Chand Verma, I.O. of the case.

7. After that the statement of the appellant/ accused was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The oral and documentary evidence was put to him in question form, who denied the allegations made against him and stated that he has been falsely implicated. He has stated that 3-4 days before the occurrence, he had gone to the hospital for obtaining some documents and x-ray report from there and had handed over to the injured an amount of Rs.400/- for that purpose. On 1.10.1995, when he contacted the injured, he was ill treated by him and the injured also hu