Ujjal Bhuyan JUDGMENT
Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, J.
FACTUAL ASPECTS
1. The Appellants, who are father and son, were prosecuted for the offence punishable Under Section 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The incident occurred on 17th September 1996. The allegation is that the Appellants assaulted one Punjabhai (the deceased) with pipes and sticks. The deceased suffered a large number of injuries and ultimately succumbed to the injuries. By judgment dated 5th July 1997, the Sessions Court acquitted the Appellants. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the Sessions Court, the Respondent - State of Gujarat preferred an appeal against acquittal before the High Court. By the impugned judgment dated 14th December 2018, the High Court interfered and converted the acquittal of the Appellants into a conviction for the offence punishable Under Section 302, read with Section 34 and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. By order dated 6th January 2020, this Court directed that the present appeal be listed for hearing. By order dated 18th May 2021, the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail by the first Appellant was rejected by this Court. However, this Court continued the order dated 21st January 2019 by which exemption was granted to the second Appellant from surrendering.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that PW-1 Danabhai is the brother of the deceased. He had two brothers. The deceased was engaged in the business of diamond polishing. At about 9.45 pm on 17th September 1996, when PW-1 was sitting in his pan-bidi shop, one Vajsurbhai came to him by motorcycle and told him that the Appellants had assaulted the deceased. On hearing this news, PW-1 went towards village Jhanjhmer. He met his uncle Ramabhai on the outskirts of the village, who was taking the deceased to the hospital by a tempo. According to the prosecution case, Karshanbhai (PW-4), Dayabhai, Jivabhai and other villagers were sitting in the tempo. The deceased was taken to the clinic of Dr. Goti at Dhola village. As per his advice, the deceased was immediately shifted to Bhavnagar in a private hospital. The deceased succumbed to the injuries in the early morning of 18th September 1996.
3. The Trial Court disbelieved the testimony of PW-4 Karshanbhai for various reasons. In the impugned judgment, the High Court noted that though, according to the case of PW-4, he received injuries on 17th September 1996 at the hands of the Accused, Dr. Jagdishbhai (PW-5) deposed that PW-4 informed him that he suffered injuries on 18th September 1996. The High Court, in the impugned judgment, held that in his police statement, PW-4, had correctly stated that he was injured on 18th September 1996. Therefore, the statement he gave before the Court and the statement given by the doctor were meaningless. The High Court held that although the number of persons who witnessed the incident have not been examined, the Appellants failed to adduce any evidence to falsify the prosecution's version. By the impugned judgment, after overturning the acquittal of the Appellants, the High Court sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment.
SUBMISSIONS
4. The learned Senior Couns........