PUTLABAI BHIMASHANKAR PATTAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Four accused came to be tried for the offences punishable under sections 302, 326,325, 324 and 323 each read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and section 135 read with section 37(1) of Bombay Police Act. By his judgment and order dated 12th April, 1989 the learned Ilnd Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur was pleased to convict all the four accused for the offences punishable under sections 302, 326, 324, and 323 each read with section34 of the Indian Penal Code whereas accused nos.l to 3 came to be convicted for the offences punishable under section 135 read with section 37(1) of the Bombay Police Act and accused no.4 came to be acquitted from the said charges.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence accused nos.l to 3 filed Criminal Appeal No.380 of 1989 whereas accused no.4 filed Criminal Appeal No.292 of 1989 and during the pendency of these appeals, accused nos.l and 2 died and therefore, these appeals survive for accused nos.3 and 4.

(3.) As per the prosecution case, accused nos. 1 and 2 were sons of accused no.4 and accused no. 3 is the son of the sister of accused no.4. The house of accused No.4 in New Pachha Peth, Ashok Chowk, Solapur was located opposite the house of the complainant Chanappa Kumbhar and there was some dispute between the two families on account of drain water. Accused no.3 had come to visit his aunt at Solapur though he was originally the resident of village Mangrul in Akkalkot taluka of Solapur district. On the date of the incident i.e. 3rd July, 1988 at about 5.30 a.m. the complainant shouted at his buffalo which was tied in front of his house and he used abusive language while doing so. The members of the family of the accused were awake at that time and accused no.4 heard the words used by the complainant and she presumed that he had abused her. She therefore got angry and came out of her house alongwith other accused to question the complainant who gave the explanation that he abused his buffalo and not accused no.4. However, this explanation did not appeal the accused and accused nos.l to 3 who were armed with knives and iron bars started assaulting the complainant. When he sustained bleedings injuries in the assault, Vithal the younger son of the complainant who was nearby and was loading manure in the bullock cart tried to intervene so as to save his father from further attacks and in this process Vithal was assaulted by accused nos. 1 to 3 with knives and iron bars. He sustained multiple stab injuries on his chest and grievous injuries on his forehead and hand etc. He collapsed and at that stage, Siddharam the elder son of the complainant tried to intervene but he also received blows from the accused. In the process, he was alleged to have hit a glass bottle to one of the accused i.e. accused no.2 Kallappa and Siddharam also received bleeding injuries. After Vithal collapsed the accused no.l Dhondappa dropped the iron bar on the road and which was picked up by accused no.4 who also assaulted Vithal. Accused no.3 fled from the place and went towards the MIDC side. However, when some neighbours had alerted the police and police van reached the spot. Accused nos.l, 2 and 4 were taken in the police van. Accused No.l filed the complaint which was registered as a FIR in C.R. No......giving rise to Sessions Case No.7 of 1989 which had ltimately resulted in an acquittal.