ONKAR MOATIRAM KALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have been convicted for murder of Ramkrishna under section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. , for causing grievous hurt with dangerous weapon to Nirmala P. W. 2 under section 326 read with 34 I. P. C. For the offence of murder, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, for offence under section 326 read with 34 I. P. C. , they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default R. I. , for one year each. Though they have been held guilty for voluntarily causing hurt to P. W. 2 Nirmala under section 324 read with 34 I. P. C. , yet no separate sentence has been imposed. In addition, appellants No. 3 to 5 have also been convicted for causing grievous hurt to Manohar P. W. 5 under section 325 read with 34 I. P. C. and the said appellants have been sentenced to R. I. for 2 years. Out of the fine recovered, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been ordered to be paid to Nirmala P. W. 2 as compensation. The period of detention during the trial has been set off in terms of section 428 Cri. P. C.

(2.) THE appellants challenged their conviction and sentence imposed on them in this appeal. Reference to brief facts of the prosecution case at this stage is necessary in order to appreciate submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellants and the learned A. P. P. Of course detailed reference to the prosecution evidence shall be necessary at a later stage.

(3.) THE appellants are closely related to each other. Appellant No. 1 Onkar is the husband of appellant No. 8 Baby who is the daughter of appellant No. 4 Domaji. Appellant No. 6 Mathurabai is the wife of appellant No. 4 Domaji. Appellant No. 7 Rekha is the wife of appellant No. 2 Devidas. Appellants Devidas, Waman and Ramdas are brothers and they are sons of appellant Domaji. The appellants and the deceased Ramkrishna lived in the neighbourhood. There is admittedly previous enmity between them. On the earlier day of the incident in question, there was an incident in respect of which deceased Ramkrishna, Manohar P. W. 5 and others have been prosecuted. On the day of the incident i. e. to say 31-8-1991 at about 6. 15 a. m. while Ramkrishna was passing infront of the house of appellant No. 4 Domaji, he was assaulted by appellant No. 1 Onkar and appellant No. 2 Devidas. When Nirmala P. W. 2 intervened, she was also assaulted by appellant No. 1 Onkar and appellant No. 2 Devidas. The assault on deceased Ramkrishna and Nirmala P. W. 2 by appellant Onkar and appellant Devidas is stated to be by means of swords. The prosecution case further is that when the assault on deceased Ramkrishna and P. W. 2 Nirmala was made, all the other appellants were present at that time. Appellant No. 3 Waman and appellant No. 4 Domaji had sticks with them and appellant No. 5 Ramdas had iron rod. Appellants No. 6 to 8 had chilly powder and they had thrown chilly powder during the course of the incident. After the assault on deceased Ramkrishna and Nirmala P. W. 2, Manohar P. W. 5 had come to the spot and when he tried to lift deceased Ramkrishna, he was assaulted by appellant No. 2 Devidas and appellant No. 3 Waman by means of sticks and by appellant No. 5 Ramdas by means of iron road. As a result of the assault, Ramkrishna had received eight injuries and he expired as a result of the said injuries on the same day. Nirmala P. W. 2 had also received eight injuries on her person and Manohar P. W. 5 had received four injuries on his person. The incident in question is reported to have been witnessed by Sunita P. W. 1 daughter-in-law of deceased Ramkrishna, Nirmala P. W. 2 wife of the deceased who was injured, Manohar P. W. 5 son of the deceased who was also injured, Khandu P. W. 6 who lives in the neighbourhood, as also Pandurang P. W. 7. Besides the evidence of the eye witnesses, there is evidence relating to recovery of weapons, seizure of clothes of some of the appellants on which blood stains were found.