JUDGMENT K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M. Shah for the appellant - State. 2. By way of this Appeal, the State has felt aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 12.04.2012 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No. 20/2011 whereby the respondent herein was convicted and sentenced as under:- Under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 60,000/- in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year. The Court had also ordered amount of Rs. 50,000/- to be paid to the victim in the form of compensation u/s. 357(2) of Cr.P.C. The accused was given the benefit of set of u/s. 428 of Cr.P.C. 3. The case in brief and the incident which is alleged to have occurred on 23.12.2010 is as under:- 3.1. The complainant Sajidbhai @ Muno Mahmadbhai Musiya, Mouje Devaliya, Tal. Babra was earning his livelihood doing the business of driving. On the said day, at about 6.30 pm in the evening, he alongwith his friend Pravin Shambhubhai had gone for answering nature's call in the jungle situated behind his house. At that moment, the complainant saw his niece Sharifa going alone for answering the nature's call. Then he heard some shouts. While returning back, the complainant saw Sharifa lying in an unconscious condition and blood was oozing from her head. Other persons from the village had also come and they took Sharifa in a goods vehicle to the village. Thereafter, the injured Sharifa was taken to Devaliya Hospital from where she was taken in 108 Ambulance Van for further treatment to Babra Hospital, Amreli and thereafter she was shifted to Rajkot Hospital. 3.2. Thus, it is alleged that while Sharifa had gone for answering nature's call, some unknown person had attacked her with sharp and deadly weapon. In this regard, a complaint was filed with Babra Rural Police Station which was registered as I-C.R. No. 125/2010. On filing of this complaint, the investigation was entrusted to PSI - M.M. Vaagh who started investigating the case and recorded statements of relevant witnesses and drew the necessary Panchnamas. 3.3. In this regard, a complaint was filed with Babra Rural Police Station which was registered as I-C.R. No. 125/2010. On filing of this complaint, the investigation was entrusted to PSI - M.M. Vaagh who started investigating the case and recorded statements of relevant witnesses and drew the necessary Panchnamas. 3.3. Since the police found ample evidence and sufficient materials against the respondent accused, at the end of investigation, chargesheet was prepared and submitted before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Babra who followed the procedures prescribed as per Section 207 of Cr.P.C. for verifying whether the accused had been given necessary papers or not or whether the accused wanted to have a private advocate or not? 3.4. Since the case was exclusively sessions triable, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Babra committed the case to the Court of Sessions, wherein charges were framed against the accused vide Exhibit 3 which was read over and explained to the accused. Thereafter, plea of the accused was recorded vide Exhibit 4 wherein the accused denied his involvement and pleaded to be tried. 3.5. After filing closing pursis from the prosecution, further statement of the accused was recorded as per Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure wherein the accused again denied his involvement. After hearing both the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli vide his judgment and order passed the above sentence. 3.6. At the time of trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:- Particulars Exhibit Complainant Sajidbhai Mohammedbhai Musiya 25 Dr. Kamleshbhai Himmatgiri Gosai (the Medical Officer who examined the victim) 7 Dr. Dharmesh Pravinchandra Gandhi Medical Officer, Amreli 29 Dr. Prakashchandra Gokaldas Modha Medical Officer, Rajkot 36 Dr. 3.6. At the time of trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:- Particulars Exhibit Complainant Sajidbhai Mohammedbhai Musiya 25 Dr. Kamleshbhai Himmatgiri Gosai (the Medical Officer who examined the victim) 7 Dr. Dharmesh Pravinchandra Gandhi Medical Officer, Amreli 29 Dr. Prakashchandra Gokaldas Modha Medical Officer, Rajkot 36 Dr. Janmejay Krishnachandra Nathwani (Medical Officer, Rajkot) 41 Panch Witness Madhubhai Tulsibhai Javiya 15 Panch Witness Maheshbhai Girishbhai Makwana 17 Panch Witness Hasmukhbhai Pragjibhai Parvadia 19 Panch Witness Dipakbhai Mohanbhai Parmar 23 Victim 24 Sangitaben Gondalia 27 Pravinbhai Shambhubhai Gondalia 28 Ashokbhai Bachubhai Gohel, Deputy Mamlatdar 35 Sadur alias Sajanbhai Sukhabhai 51 Prabhaben Sadurbhai 52 Babubhai Keshavbhai Sandania 53 Nandlala Parshottambhai Borisagar (ASI, Amreli) 47 Kanubhai Jilubhai Vala (ASI, who registered the crime) 48 Investigating Officer mulubhai Munjabhai vaagh 56 The prosecution also relied upon various documentary evidences, some of them are:- Particulars Exhibit Medical Certificate 8 Yadi of the M.L.C. Case 9 Panchnama of scene of offence 16 Panchnama of the position of the body of the injured 18 Panchnama of the arrest of the accused 20 Discovery Panchnama 23 Complaint of the complainant Sajidbhai @ Muno Mahmadbhai Musiya 26 Yadi given by the Medical Officer, Civil Hospital to the Amreli City Police Station 30 Medical Certificate from General Hospital, Amreli 31 Injury Certificate by the Dr. Prakash Moda, Gokul Superspecialist Hospital 37 Discharge Card 38 Police Yadi 39 Police Yadi regarding the blood sample of the victim 40 Refer Note 42 OPD Case Paper 43 Medical Certificate of the Medical College and Hospital, Rajkot 46 Map of the scene of offence 54 Report of the Investigation Van 57 Receipt about the muddamal received by the FSL 59 Analysis of the serological department 60 Information regarding the testing of muddamal 61 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M. Shah has submitted that the State has preferred this Appeal for enhancement of the sentence and the learned Sessions Judge ought to have appreciated the overall circumstances that the accused is said to have committed the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and hence, the sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge is inadequate and insufficient and requires to be enhanced in view of the evidence laid down by the prosecution. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has taken this Court to Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code which reads as under:- "307. Attempt to murder. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has taken this Court to Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code which reads as under:- "307. Attempt to murder. -Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned." Further, it is submitted that the learned Judge ought not to have given much emphasis to the contradictions and/or omission appearing in the offence of the prosecution witness, if any. Considering the above, it is submitted that this is a fit case which requires the interference of this Court and hence, the sentence qua the respondent accused be enhanced. 5. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Ms. C.M. Shah and perused the records of the case. It is not in dispute that the accused had caused injuries on the victim as stated above. Besides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has given very cogent and convincing reasons for arriving at the sentence imposed qua the accused. The accused was identified by the victim as well as other witnesses and the axe used in the alleged commission of crime was also recovered. The latter paragraphs of the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge has detailed the circumstances and the various findings arrived at. Besides, the learned Judge had also ordered amount of Rs. 50,000/- to be paid to the victim in the form of compensation u/s. 357(2) of Cr.P.C. 6. Hence, this Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and findings recorded by the trial Court and adopting the said reasons as well as the reasons aforesaid, in our view, the impugned Judgment is just, legal and proper and requires no interference by this Court. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, the judgement and order dated 12.04.2012 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No. 20/2011 is confirmed. 8. The Appeal is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. Bail and bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, the judgement and order dated 12.04.2012 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No. 20/2011 is confirmed. 8. The Appeal is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. Bail and bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent to the concerned Trial Court forthwith. Appeal Dismissed