ZAKIR @ ZAKIR PASHA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the prosecution is that on 15.10.2007 at about 10.00 p.m., the younger brother of the complainant by name Bakhash was going in front of the house of accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 on his - two wheeler. At that time, the accused picked up a quarrel with Bakhash by saying as to why he was showing off in front of their house. On the next day, on 16.10.2007 at about 11.00 a.m., the accused having an ill-will against the said Bakhash with respect to the said incident, when the said Bakhash was playing in front of the house of the complainant- PW-1, accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 came with an intention to commit the murder of Bakhash. They picked up a quarrel and with a common intention, accused No.1 stabbed on the right part of the stomach of Bakhash with a knife, accused No.2 stabbed on the back of Bakhash and accused No.4 instigated the accused Nos.1 and 2 to commit the murder of Bakhash. Due to the injuries sustained, he died on the way to the hospital. Based on these averments, a case was registered against five accused persons. Investigation was taken up. A charge-sheet was filed against accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos.3 and 5 were not set up for trial.

(2.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses and marked 22 exhibits alongwith six material objects. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. By the impugned judgment, the accused No.2 was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- for the offence punishable under section 324 of The Indian Penal Code. Accused No.1 was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence punishable under section 302 of The Indian Penal Code. Accused No.4 was acquitted of all the charges levelled against him. Aggrieved by the same, accused No.1 has filed the present appeal.

(3.) Sri. Narayan Perdalkar, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused contends that the impugned judgment of the trial court is bad in law and liable to be set-aside. That the trial court has failed to consider the plea of the appellant. That the trial court has misread the evidence on record. That the specific case of the appellant was based on selfdefence. Under these circumstances, the trial court has failed to understand the case made out against the appellant/accused No.1. Hence, he pleads that the appeal be allowed by acquitting accused No.1. On the other hand, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor disputes the same. He contends that substantial material has been led in to prove the case of the prosecution. That the case of self-defence set up by the appellant/accused No.1 was negated by the trial court. That there is no material to indicate that it was the witnesses, who were the aggressors. On the contrary, the entire evidence led in by the prosecution would indicate, that it was all the accused, who came near the house of the deceased, picked up a quarrel and brutally assaulted him. Hence, he pleads that there is no perversity committed by the trial court that calls for any interference.