JUDGMENT : A.S. SUPEHIA, J. 1. The present Appeal is taken up in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court dated 1st August 2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 2296 of 2023, whereby the Supreme Court has directed this Court to hear the captioned Criminal Appeal as far as possible preferably within a period of six months. 2. The occasion for the present appellants to approach the Supreme Court was the judgment and order dated 17th March 2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2488 of 2008 and captioned Criminal Appeal No. 2186 of 2008, wherein and whereby a Coordinate Bench of this Court had confirmed the conviction of the present appellants recorded by the trial court convicting them for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them for three years and a fine of Rs. 100.00. 3. By the said judgment and order, the conviction recorded by the trial court in case of accused no. 7 under the provisions of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has been modified to that of under Section 304 Part (I) of the IPC and he was sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The same was also challenged before the Supreme Court. 4. The matter is remitted by the Supreme Court vide order dated 1st August 2023 since the present appellants had assailed their confirmation of conviction as recorded by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC and sentencing them for three years imprisonment. 5. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Nasir Saiyed, appearing for the appellants who are original accused nos. 2, 3 and 4, has submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is premised on the injuries suffered by the brother of the complainant (PW-6) Abhesinh Devuji Thakore (Exh.64). It is submitted that the trial court has acquitted the present appellants for the other offences by giving them benefit of doubt. Learned advocate Mr. 2, 3 and 4, has submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is premised on the injuries suffered by the brother of the complainant (PW-6) Abhesinh Devuji Thakore (Exh.64). It is submitted that the trial court has acquitted the present appellants for the other offences by giving them benefit of doubt. Learned advocate Mr. Saiyed, while inviting the attention of this Court to the evidence of Abhesinh Devuji Thakore (PW-6) at Exh.64, has submitted that in fact he cannot be termed as a reliable witness since in his deposition he has admitted that after the date of the incident he remained unconscious for three days, whereas in the history recorded by the doctor at Exh.45, the medical certificate mentions that he was fully conscious and he has stated that he would give the names of the accused in his police complaint. So far as the other injured witness Gopalsang Devuji Thakore (PW-4) is concerned, he has invited the attention to certificate at Exh.46, in which only the name of accused no. 7 is mentioned and not the present accused. 6. Learned advocate Mr. Saiyed has also submitted that as per the charge Exh.30, it is the case of the prosecution that the present appellant-accused no. 2 Thakore Amratji @ Tinaji Jaswantji @ Jalaji had inflicted stick blows on the injured witness Baldevji Virsinghji, however, he has not been examined as a witness. The charge also reveals that the accused no. 3 Thakore Chenaji Gambhirji had inflicted stick blows on the PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore, whereas, the accused no. 4 Thakore Ramjiji @ Bodo Khodaji had inflicted injuries on the PW-4 Gopalsang Devuji Thakore. 7. It is submitted that the trial court has recorded the conviction under the provisions of Section 325 of the IPC only on the alleged assault by the present appellants – original accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 on the injured witness PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore, which appears to be contrary to the evidence. 8. Learned advocate Mr. Saiyed has submitted that the trial court having acquitted all the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 324, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the IPC, then even the presence of the present appellants at the scene of offence could be said to be doubtful. Finally, it is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Saiyed has submitted that the trial court having acquitted all the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 324, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the IPC, then even the presence of the present appellants at the scene of offence could be said to be doubtful. Finally, it is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Saiyed that even looking to the injury certificates issued by the doctors as well as the evidence of the doctors, it is manifest that the role attributed to the present appellants in the charge does not reconcile with the injuries which have been suffered. Thus, it is submitted that it is a clear case of acquittal and the present appellants may be acquitted for the charge which is levelled against them. 9. Opposing the present Appeal and submissions of the learned advocate Mr. Saiyed, learned APP Mr. Tirthraj Pandya has submitted that the observations and conviction recorded by the trial court do not require any interference by this Court as the same is precisely passed by examining the ocular as well as medical evidence. He has referred to the injury certificates of the injured witnesses, more particularly, PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore, and has submitted that the evidence of PW-1/Dr. Jashvant Revabhai Yadav at Exh.42 would reveal that in fact the injured witnesses suffered injuries by the assault of stick which were being held by the present accused. 10. Learned APP has further referred to the injury certificates of the present accused and has submitted that the same would establish that the incident had occurred and cross FIR has also been filed Exh.130. Thus, it is submitted that the presence of the accused at the scene of offence is established and, therefore, the trial court has precisely convicted and sentenced the appellants. Hence, it is urged that the present Appeal may not be entertained. 11. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties at length. We have also perused the evidence as pointed out. As recorded herein above, vide order dated 1st August 2023 passed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2296 of 2023, the captioned Criminal Appeal has been remitted. 12. As per the charge (Exh.30), there were seven accused arraigned for the commission of the offence as mentioned therein being offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 325, 324, 323, 506(2) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 13. 12. As per the charge (Exh.30), there were seven accused arraigned for the commission of the offence as mentioned therein being offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 325, 324, 323, 506(2) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 13. By the judgment and order dated 4th August 2008, the trial court has acquitted the accused nos. 1, 5 and 6, however, the trial court has convicted the accused no. 7 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced him for life. Here in the present case, the appellants who are arraigned as accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and even sentenced for three years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100.00 and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment. 14. As per the charge and the case of the prosecution, the present appellants-accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 had inflicted stick blows on the injured witnesses. It is alleged that the accused no. 2 Thakore Amratji @ Tinaji Jaswantji @ Jalaji had inflicted stick blows on the injured witness Baldevji Virsinghji on his shoulder, however, unquestionably, he has not been examined as a witness. It is alleged that the accused no. 3 Thakore Chenaji Gambhirji had inflicted stick blows on the PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore. It is further alleged that the accused no. 4 Thakore Ramjiji @ Bodo Khodaji had inflicted injuries on the PW-4 Gopalsang Devuji Thakore. The trial court has acquitted the present appellants of all the offences except for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC. Thus, the trial court has not believed the offence under Section 149 of the IPC as well as has acquitted the present appellants-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 324 and 323 of the IPC including Sections 504 and 506(2) of the IPC by giving them benefit of doubt. Thus, the aspect with regard to the accused having formed an unlawful assembly is read over by the trial court, however, simultaneously the trial court has convicted the present appellants under Section 325 of the IPC on the basis of the injuries suffered by the PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore, who has been examined at Exh.64. We have threadbare examined his deposition. We have threadbare examined his deposition. In his deposition, he has specifically stated that the incident had occurred on 29.6.2007 in the night hours at about 9:30 p.m. and the accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 were armed with sticks. He has stated that the accused no. 3 Thakore Chenaji Gambhirji had inflicted a stick blow on his left side of his head. He has attributed that the accused no. 4 Thakore Ramjiji @ Bodo Khodaji was armed with a stick and accused no. 2 Thakore Amratji @ Tinaji Jaswantji @ Jalaji was also armed with a stick. It is stated that all of them had thereafter assaulted the deceased. However, the trial court has not believed the version with regard to the assault on the victim but has believed that all the three accused had assaulted the PW-6/Abhesinh Devuji Thakore and caused injuries to him. In the cross-examination, it is elicited that after the assault, he had remained unconscious for three days. In the examination-in-chief, he has stated that when he was assaulted and was taken in rickshaw, he went unconscious. It is deposed by him that he was taken to Patan Civil Hospital and thereafter at Mehsana and was examined by one Dr. Maheshbhai Babubhai Trivedi (PW-3) who is examined at Exh.57. He has further deposed that he remained in the hospital of Dr.Maheshbhai Babubhai Trivedi and was unconscious for three days. In the cross-examination, he has further elicited that he has attended his father’s funeral. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the history given by him before the doctor (Exh.45). He has specifically stated that he would give the names of the accused in his police complaint. The medical certificate reveals that the patient was conscious. Thus, the evidence before the doctor runs contrary to the medical certificate at Exh.45. The deposition of this witness does not inspire confidence as he has been changing his version. 15. So far as the injuries suffered by PW-4 Gopalsang Devuji Thakore is concerned, it would be apposite to refer to the injury certificate and the history recorded therein at Exh.46. The history reveals that he has only named the accused no. 7 Thakor Jashvantji @ Jalaji Gambhirji, who has given a stick blow on him. Even otherwise, the trial court has not convicted the present appellants by premising on the evidence of PW-4 Gopalsang Devuji Thakore. The history reveals that he has only named the accused no. 7 Thakor Jashvantji @ Jalaji Gambhirji, who has given a stick blow on him. Even otherwise, the trial court has not convicted the present appellants by premising on the evidence of PW-4 Gopalsang Devuji Thakore. 16. As recorded herein above, so far as the assault by accused no. 2 Thakore Amratji @ Tinaji Jaswantji @ Jalaji on the injured witness Baldevji Virsinghji is concerned, we fail to understand why he has not been examined as a witness. Thus, the conviction by the trial court by placing reliance solely on the deposition of the PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore appears to be erroneous. It is not in dispute that the incident has occurred in view of the cross case filed by the present appellants also, wherein the medical certificates which are produced on record reveal that they have also suffered injuries. However, the evidence of the PW-6 Abhesinh Devuji Thakore does not appear to be of a sterling quality and raises doubt. Hence, we do not agree with the findings recorded by the trial court and hence benefit of doubt is required to be given on the evidence, which have been pointed out before us. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present Criminal Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 4th August 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Patan, in Sessions Case No. 59 of 2007, is hereby quashed and set-aside. The present appellants being accused nos. 2, 3 and 4, namely, Thakore Amratji @ Tinaji Jaswantji @ Jalaji, Thakore Chenaji Gambhirji and Thakore Ramjiji @ Bodo Khodaji, are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. Bail bond furnished by them are ordered to be cancelled. Fine, if paid, be refunded. Records and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the trial court concerned forthwith.