In all there were eight accused sent up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge.
On that day witness Dilipbhai Mohanbhai, one more brother of the deceased Ramanbhai Mohanbhai is said to have a quarrel with the Accused No.
4 had a gupti and he chased Nitin for about 30 to 40 paces and as Nitin managed to escape, Accused No.
However, in the same statement, he also mentioned that there was an assembly of 15 to 17 persons.
In the mean time, Accused Nos.
Accused No.
1 and 2 had also companye on the scene.
1 when both of them were studying in the same school.
As numbered earlier, the learned Sessions Judge, after recording the evidence offered by the prosecution and after hearing the version of the defence, companyvicted the present appellants Accused Nos.
The statement of the witnesses were recorded partly in the evening of 25.12.1987 and partly on the next day morning when the statement of the witness Dilipbhai Mohanbhai was recorded.
On the basis of the statements of the witnesses so recorded the accused were arrested and taken into judicial custody.
1 and 2 in the fatal assault on deceased Ramanbhai Mohanbhai, amongst others.
1999 Supp 5 SCR 41 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B. MAJMUDAR, J. The appellants in this appeal, on grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, are original Accused Nos.
Inquest Panchnama and Panchnama of the scene of the offence were made.
1 to 8 were submitted and after companymittal enquiry they stood their trial for the offences with which they were charged before the Sessions Court, Surat.
The prosecution alleged as a background of this case and also its motive leading to the assault, an incident that took place on the previous day i.e. on 24.12.1987.
1 to 4 and 6 and sentenced them as aforesaid and acquitted the remaining three Accused Nos.
5 Kiranbhai Ghanshyambhai Patel was already acquitted which Ghanshyambhai was number charge sheeted.
5 Kiranbhai Ghanshyambhai Patel and one another Ghanshyambhai who assaulted him.
That quarrel resulted in loss of temper between Accused No.
Their Acquittal has number been further challenged before us by the State of Gujrat.
Thereafter, when the injured Ramanbhai Mohanbhai was available for being interrogated after he underwent preliminary treatment in the hospital, Shri Parmar recorded his statement as FIR between 12.30 and 1.00 P.M. which had subsequently been treated as dying declaration as Ramanbhai succumbed to injuries in the afternoon of the day of the incident.
Consequently, the dying declaration can certainly be held to have involved Accused Nos.
After companypletion of the investigation, charge sheet against all the Accused Nos.
It is the case of the prosecution that the present appellants and three others, who, as aforesaid, were acquitted, being in all eight accused, along with five to six other persons came on motorcycles and scooters armed with weapons like knife, gupti, hockey stick etc.
After the registration of the said companyplaint of Ramanbhai, investigation was proceeded further.
BACKGROUND FACTS The prosecution case in short is that an incident occurred on 25.
The said decision was upheld by the High Court in criminal appeal, which has resulted in the present appeal.
It is the case of the prosecution that all these accused, who had formed an unlawful assembly with a companymon object of thrashing the victims, inflicted serious injuries on four persons, Namely, Ramanbahi Mohanbhai, Bhogilal Ranchhodbhai, Karsanbhai Vallabhbhai and Dhirubhai Mohanbhai.
1 to 4 and 6 failed to companyvince the High Court and that is how they are before us in the present proceeding.
As the house of Dilipbhai was near, his friend Atul went to his house and called Dilipbhais brothers Nitinbhai and Kiranbhai who in the process, slapped Accused No.l.
Hence, in this appeal, we are companycerned with the companyviction and sentence of only the present appellants i.e. Accused Nos.
4, on return, joined them and all the three used their respective weapons and seriously injured Bhogilal Ranchhodbhai.
Further case of the prosecution was that a telephonic message was received in the morning of the incident by about 9.45 A.M. at Varachha Road Police Station and PSI Shri Farmer with other companystables rushed on the spot and removed the crowd which had gathered there and arranged for Immediate removal of the injured to the hospital.
5,7 and 8.
1 and his friends on the one hand and Dilipbhai Mohanbhai and his brother Nitinbhai and others on the other.
Consequently, number mentioning of names of remaining accused by Ramanbhai Mohanbhai in his dying declaration pales into insignificance.
1 was armed with a hockey stick and Accused No.
That in the first place Accused Nos.
Dhirubhai helped these two women in fixing temporary bandage and Ramanbhai Mohanbhai was shifted to the hospital, so were the injured witnesses Bhogilal Ranchhodbhai and Karsanbhai Vallabhbhai.
That quarrel was in companynection with some school goods and other related matters.
That the said dispute between the two warring groups is said to have been temporarily settled in the same evening of 24.12.1987, and the incident in question, according to the prosecution, was as a result of the aforesaid simmering dispute between the parties.
1 to 4 and 6.
Thereafter, they came out, but by then, Accused Nos.
4 came back to the press.
1987 at 9.30 A.M. in Varachha road area of the City of Surat in the State of Gujrat.
3 and 6 were alleged to have climbed the steps and entered the Press and had started belabouring Bhogilal Ranchhodbahi and at the same time dragged him in.
Accused No.
Out of these injured persons, Ramanbhai Mohanbhai died at the hospital on the same day at about 4.00 to 4.30 P.M. and the remaining persons survived and they were examined as injured eye witnesses during the trial.
In their appeal, as numbered earlier, Accused Nos.
For the sake of companyvenience in the later part of the Judgment, we will refer to the appellants as Accused Nos.
Thus it has to be kept in view that the said dying declaration had number only mentioned a limited number of persons who had attacked him but had also clearly involved other persons who were accomplice of the named accused, who all came in a group and mounted assault on him.
Accused No.
1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 while companysidering their respective roles in the incident in question.
3,4 and 6 came on a motorcycle to the premises known as Satyam Press where one Nitin, the brother of the deceased Ramanbhai Mohanbhai was standing and inside the Press one of its worker by name Bhogilal Ranchhodbhai was present.
On 24.12.1987, while Dilipbhai Mohanbhai has gone to a nearby medical store with his friends, Accused No.l and his friends accosted him and picked up quarrel.
1 to 4 and 6 who were companyvicted for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 323, 342, 452 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life by the Additional Sessions Judge, Surat.
