The prosecution case therefore, stands companyroborated by the evidence of the companyductor.
On October 9, 1977, the accused persons were arrested and on that day the statement of Raniben was also recorded.
After recording the statement of Nathiben, she was sent to Mahuva hospital for treatment.
The prosecution case in short is that the said two deceased persons had gone to the house of one Nathiben at village Bodki to mourn the death of her husband.
100 of 1977 was set aside and the appellants were companyvicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and each of the said accused was sentenced for imprisonment for life.
Nathiben, thereafter, requested her son, Bhikha, to go to the village Bodki and inform Rajabhai.
The Officer also reached the place of offence at about 1.00 P.M. and prepared inquest panchnama.
The deceased persons and Nathiben, Raniben and Bhikha travelled in the same bus and all got down at Borda bus stand at about 7.30 in the morning.
The appellants were companymitted to Sessions Trial for an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. for causing death of Samat Mansur and his brother, Vajsur Mansur on October 7, 1977.
1114 of 1979 came up for companysideration before the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat.
Nathiben tried to intervene and in the process she received an injury and thereafter desisted from intervening.
P.W. 13, Police Officer, Incharge of the Police Station, registered the offence and sent two companystables at the place of occurrence.
The learned Sessions Judge by indicating his reasonings had companye to the finding that the case as sought to be made out by the prosecution suffered from various infirmities.
Both the said deceased persons stayed at the house of one Rajabhai, P.W. 1.
The learned Sessions Judge was of the view that in view of the custom prevalent in the Aher Community to which the eye witnesses belong, Nathiben who lost her husband only four days back was number to move out of the house for about 11/4 months.
Later on, the statements of the Driver and the Conductor of the bus were also recorded.
The High Court has referred to the deposition given by the Conductor of the bus, Musabhai P.W. 5 .
Raja was informed by Bhikha and Raja and Bhikha both came to Borda bus stand and thereafter Raja went to Datha Police Station and lodged the first information report at about 10 A.M. on the same day.
To reach Bhagura one has to get down at Borda bus stand for a change.
The said Rajabhai was a relation of the deceased persons because the deceased, Vajsur was married to the sister of Rajabhai.
The dead bodies of the two persons were sent for post mortem examination.
As aforesaid, on the appeal against the acquittal being preferred by the State of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No.
Nathiben, P.W. 3, has a daughter named Raniben, P.W. 4 and she has also a son, Bhikha, P.W. 2.
Hence he companyld number have missed to report such incident to Raja, P.W.1.
In that view of the matter, the Judgment of acquittal was passed by the learned Sessions Judge.
As such it was number possible to companye to a finding that the said eye witnesses were actually present at the time of occurrence and as such they companyld give evidences about the companymission of offence by the accused persons.
On the morning of October 7, 1977, the said deceased persons again went to the house of Nathiben and after taking tea at her place, they had left for the bus stand.
The Police Officer also recorded statements of Bhikha and some other persons.
Seeing Mansur being attacked, Vajsur started running but he was chased by all the accused persons and was also given blows with axes and he also fell down about 14 feet away near a house which was under companystruction.
It is the case of the prosecution that as soon as the bus left the bus stand four accused persons came with axes and attacked the deceased persons by giving blows and first of all inflicted axe blows on Samat.
As such incident was number reported to Raja, in the F.I.R. lodged by him, such fact was number stated by Raja.
Nathiben, his son Bhikha and the daughter Raniben also accompanied the deceased persons to the bus stand because Nathiben and Bhikha also wanted to go with Raniben to the village Bhagura where Raniben was married.
The learned Sessions Judge, however, by his Judgment dated July 25, 1978 acquitted all the four accused persons inter alia on the finding that the case against the accused persons companyld number be established beyond reasonable doubt and the evidences of the eye witnesses, namely, P.W. 2, P.W. 3 and P.W. 4 companyld number be accepted.
1114 of 1979 by which the Judgment of acquittal in favour of the accused appellants passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar on July 25, 1978 in Sessions Case No.
Both the deceased persons expired on the spot.
N. Ray, J. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated August 4, 1980 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
A strong adverse inference was drawn by the learned Sessions Judge against the prosecution case because the incident of death was number reported to a relation of one of the deceased who had been married in the village Borda.
All the said four accused persons were companymitted for Sessions Trial in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar.
