A conviction under Section 307 requires intent to kill, which can be inferred from the nature of the assault and corroborating evidence.

JUDGEMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1837 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= GOPAL SOMESHWAR SHARMA - Appellant(s) Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR PP MAJMUDAR & Mr.S.P.Majmudar for Appellant(s) : 1, Mr. A.J.Desai for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI Date : 11/11/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal preferred U/s. 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code ,1973 is directed against the judgement and order passed by the learned 2/18 JUDGMENT Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.

16, Baroda dated 21.09.2006 by which the learned Judge convicted the appellant-accused U/s. 307 of Indian Penal Code for a period of 5 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default S.I for 15 days.

2. The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are stated as under:-

3. As per the complaint given by Harishkumar Somnath Gambhir which was lodged on 15.09.1999, he was serving as a booking clerk in the Reservation Office of the Indian Railway at Baroda. On 15.09.99 at about 2.00 p.m. in the afternoon, one person named Dineshbhai S.

Trivedi was also working with him in reservation office of Indian Railway. As per say of Dineshbhai S. Trivedi the appellant came to him in the office and demanded reservation form. The appellant was annoyed when the reservation form as per his request was not given to him and therefore, he assaulted Dineshbhai S. Trivedi with the knife on his abdomen. On the strength of the complaint given by Harishkumar Somnath Gambhir, the offence was registered against the appellant. The place where the incident took place was visited by the Investigating Officer and the panchnama of the place of incident was prepared. The panchnama of the seizure of clothes of the victim was prepared in presence 3/18 JUDGMENT of punch witnesses. The panchnama with regard to recovery of knife which was used in the commission of offence was also prepared. The muddamal which was recovered, was sent to FSL for the purpose of detailed analysis. The victim who sustained injuries in the accident, was taken to the hospital for the purpose of giving him immediate treatment. On the receipt of the injury certificate issued by the Hospital as well as the FSL report, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable U/s.

307 of Indian Penal Code as well as U/s. 135 of the Bombay Police Act and produced before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baroda who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Court, Baroda U/s. 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code as the case is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.

4. The charge against the appellant is framed by the learned Judge vide exh. 3 for the offence punishable U/s. 307 of Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of Bombay Police Act and appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge leveled against him.

5. The prosecution has examined the following