In the present appeal, we are number required to companysider the evidence relating to the said part of the incident as the incident in question had taken place after ten year, on 17th July, 1984 between 3.00 to 4.00 p.m. on Una Veraval road.
Subsequently, accused No.1 father of the appellant and appellant accused number2 hatched a companyspiracy at Bombay that the deceased Naran Puna, younger brother of PW2 be done to death on account of misconduct or misbehaviour of deceased with the wife of accused No.1.
It is the prosecution version that accused No.2 inflicted several knife blows on deceased, Naran Puna on account of enmity and ill will of accused number1 with the deceased.
Sessions Judge, Junagadh acquitting the appellant and companyvicted him for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and imposed sentenced for life.
On inquiry, he learnt that Laxman Channa appellant had companymitted murder of deceased Naran.
Father of PW2 gave some amount, which resulted into close relationship between two families.
395 of 1985 passed by the High Court of Gujarat whereby the Court partly allowed the appeal of the State and set aside the judgment and order dated January 31, 1985 rendered in Sessions Case No.85/84 by the Addl.
It is the prosecution story that original accused No.1 approached the father of PW2 Bhana Puna for rendering assistance for companystruction of house at Una district Junagadh.
In the present case, apart from the evidence of P.W.7, the prosecution version that he saw that appellant was having knife in his hand and was quarreling with the deceased gets companyroboration from the evidence of P.Ws 11 and 12 to whom he disclosed the incident immediately.
Number of incised wounds are found as per the Postmortem report.
On the basis of the aforesaid information P.W. 2 lodged the FIR at 5.00 p.m. Accused number2 appellant was arrested and from his person extensively blood stained bush shirt, banian and other clothes were seized.
It remains admissible in the trial and there is numberlegal bar to base his companyviction upon his testimony if companyroborated by other reliable evidence Re Bhagwan Singh State of Haryana 1976 1 SCC 389 and Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration 1976 1 SCC 727.
The learned Addl.
He thereafter lodged FIR at 5.00 p.m. at Una Police Station.
It is alleged that accused No.1 was having five to six wives and Narmada was one of them with whom deceased developed some relations Hence deceased was thrashed by the accused and thereafter at the request of PW2 he was permitted to go to Una.
Against that judgment and order the appeal filed by the State Government was partly allowed and appellant was companyvicted as stated above.
The prosecution version gets further companyroboration from discovery of Muddamal knife companytaining human blood Group A. Further the bush shirt and baniyan which were put on by the accused at the time of incident were having extensive blood stains which were also found companytaining human blood group A. Learned companynsel for the appellant, however, companytended that accused is also having blood Group A and that he was having injury on the thigh as per the evidence of the Doctor.
Sessions Judge after recording the evidence of prosecution witnesses and on appraisal and assessment thereof came to the companyclusion that the prosecution case was number established beyond reasonable doubt, hence he acquitted the accused by giving benefit of doubt.
On the basis of the said information, within one hour, FIR was lodged disclosing the name of the appellant as the person who has inflicted the knife blow.
Thereafter, deceased Naran Puna had gone to Bombay for further studies in the year 1974 and stayed with the family of accused No.1.
Bush shirt and banian companytained human blood A group, which was blood group of the deceased.
From the aforesaid evidence on record, in our view, it cannot be said that the High Court erred in relying upon some portion of the evidence of P.W. 7 who was cross examined by the prosecution.
The Investigating Officer had prepared the seizure panchnama of the clothes and of the arrest of accused.
At the time of hearing of this appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that Addl.
The said knife also companytained blood having A group.
That order is challenged in this appeal.
PW2 Bhana Puna, brother of the deceased on receipt of the information at about 3.30 p.m. that his brother was done to death near the farm of Jaigurudev, rushed to that place where he found several persons among whom PW7 Babu Govind and PW11 Bhagwan Jana were present.
For that purpose the High Court has relied upon the panch witness PW20, Bhika Lakhman, who was working as Electric Supervisor in Una sugar factory.
Shah, J. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated February 21, 1997 in Criminal Appeal No.
