Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

R/CR.MA/13479/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2022 The prosecution has also examined Mukesh Kanubhai Rana at Exh.60, who is servicing at FSL but he is only supporting about use of fire arms and firing. Where, no role of original accused No.4 can be attributed in the said incident. The prosecution has also examined Dr. Roopkumar Manilal Agarwal at Exh.62, who has supported the injuries and Dr. Dharmendra Govindlal Shah who is examined at Exh.70, who is also serving as officer-computer forensic department, Gandhinagar, has also supported the CCTV footage recovered by the prosecution at the place of incident but nothing found against the accused No.4, by which accused No.4 can be connected in the commission of crime, which is committed by accused Nos.1 to 3 as per the case of the prosecution. The other witness viz., Puransinh @ Pappu Bhadoria at Ex.86, Bankim Chandrakantbhai Bhoot at Exh.87, Vimal Singh Ramnaresh Singh Bhadoria at Exh.88, Shyamsinh Humkamsinh Chauhan at Ex.92 have also been examined either as neighbour of the complainant or as photographer, who has taken photographs at the scene of offence but no visper about the involvement of the accused No.4 in the crime in question, is found from the evidence of the above witness. Prosecution has also examined the witness viz., Rameshbhai Nandlal Patel at Exh.101, who has taken the complainant to the hospital, has also not supported the case of the prosecution and as the IO of Narendrakumar Nanjibhai Parghi, who is examined at Exh.138, is also not giving any specific role to the original accused No.4, by which the active participation of accused No.4 can be establishing in the crime in question.