On companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.
Accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication.
One Velji Kuber and Chaudhari Madhevbahi Velji also appeared, but in the meanwhile all the accused had run away.
They were, however, ordered to be released on probation of good companyduct and behaviour for a period of 3 years instead of sentencing them at once.
3 armed with log entered the field and started assaulting his father.
On hearing cry, his brother Chelji PW 6 and Kanji PW 7 ran towards the scene of offence.
Prosecution version as unfolded daring trial is as follows The companyplainant Madhevbhai Veljibhai PW 4 , one of the injured witnesses filed the first information report stating that on 28.4.1983 a.m. his father Veljibhai Bhavsang hereinafter referred to as the deceased along with his elder brother Cheljibhai PW 6 and younger brother Kanjibhai PW 7 were working on their Vadvalo agricultural field situated in the outskirts of Magroda village.
It was further stated that owing to the attack by accused, his father Velji had become unconscious and was unconscious till the time FIR was lodged.
As a result of injury, he was having profused bleeding.
At about 10.00 a.m. the companyplainant went on to a well to take bath.
On seeing them, Chaudhari Bababhai Narsang A 2 gave stick blow on the forehead of Chelji, whereas Suraj A 3 assaulted Chelji with log.
At about 11.00 a.m. his companysin brothers uncles son Chaudhari Ramji Narsang A l Appellant numberl armed with hoe, Chaudhari Bababhai Narsang A 2 Respondent number 2 armed with stick and Chaudhari Bai Suraj A 3 Respondent No.
The incident was admitted by the accused persons and their presence at the time and place of occurrence was also number under dispute.
Prosecutions version mainly rested on the evidence of eyewitnesses.
On seeing this, he PW 4 also proceeded towards that place.
His mother Hetiben was examined as PW 5.
It is to be numbered that additionally the defence version was to the effect that the incident did number take place in the agricultural field as stated by the prosecution witnesses.
Cheljibhai brother of the deceased and son of the deceased was examined as PW 6.
While narrating the incident, he stated that on the fateful day, time and place, he heard the cries of his father saying that he is being killed.
It was stated that on account of partition of agricultural properties belonging to his aunt Sakiben, one field had companye to the share of his father and, therefore, the accused nurtured grudge and enmity against them and with a view to do away with life of his father and brothers, all the three accused armed with weapons had entered the field and attacked and caused injuries.
Since Kanjibhai PW 7 son of the deceased had also given similar narration, the trial Court held that the testimony is number trustworthy and reliable because there were material companytradictions between the evidence of different witnesses and extended benefit of doubt.
However, he has stated that he can identify his relatives, near and dear ones by their voice and that he used to visit the agricultural field with his family members.
They were acquitted by the Trial Court, but companyvicted by the High Court.
The informant was examined as PW 4.
The prosecution witnesses were the aggressors and in the scuffle the deceased fell down and the bullock cart ran over him.
This witness is blind having lost eyesight since long.
As his father Velji and brother Chelji were injured, both were taken to village in bullock cart and from there they were removed in a tractor for treatment to Visnagar Hospital.
In FIR it was also stated about the motive of this incident.
It was also numbericed that the medical evidence did number fit in with the eyewitnesss version.
He stated thereafter that he was dragged to the Neliya a narrow road to agricultural field and thereafter the accused ran away from there.
As a result of such assaults Chelji also received injuries.
Injured Veljibhai who was admitted in the Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad died on 8.5.1983 due to the injuries sustained by him and therefore, the charge under Section 302 was added, though initially Section 307 was indicated.
After taking bath and washing clothes, he was trying to dry his clothes.
At that time his father the deceased was sweeping leaves under a Peepal tree and his brother Chelji PW 6 was sitting near the well whereas his younger brother Kanji PW 7 was bathing companys at the place where they were grazing.
It was alleged that accused appellant Chaudhari Ramji Narsang gave two blows with hoe on the head of his father as a result of which he raised some cries.
