STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. JALINDER PANDURANG PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31st December 1994 passed by the Learned Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli acquitting Accused ­ Respondents herein for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 341read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is as under:

(3.) Learned APP invites attention of this Court to the evidence of eye witnesses, so also medical evidence and other evidence brought on record by the prosecution. It is urged by the learned APP that, Dhananjay (PW 6) is injured eye witness and he has witnessed the entire incident, and therefore, the Trial Court ought to have believed the evidence of Dhananjay (PW 6). There are two other eye witnesses whose evidence corroborates with the version of Dhananjay (PW 6). The medical officer has given categorical finding that, the death of Shivaji was homicidal. There is evidence in the nature of CA report which lends support to the prosecution case.