STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VISHA DAJI MOHOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this appeal the State of Maharashtra challenges the judgment and order dated 15/11/1985 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 303/1984 whereby the Respondents have been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 341 I. P. C.

(2.) SHORTLY stated the prosecution case runs as under : Respondent No. 2 Daji Mor is the father of Respondent nos. 1,3 and 4 viz. Visha Mohor, Rupaji Mor and Vishnu Mor. At the time of the incident the four Respondents, the deceased Mahadya (brother of Respondent no. 2 Daji Mor and uncle of other three Respondents ). Shanker P. W. 1, Sakhibai @ Laxmibai P. W. 2 and Rami P. W. 3, the son, sister in law and the wife of the deceased Mahadya, respectively, lived in contiguous houses in village Akegaon, Taluka Palghar, District - Thane. There was enmity between the deceased Mahadya and the Respondent Daji because the former demanded his share in tamarind trees but the latter was not prepared to give the same. A day before the incident a quarrel, between Daji and Mahadya had taken place at house of their sister Sakhibai @ Laxmibai P. W. 2 situated in the same village. On 13. 2. 82 Mahadya had gone to the jungle for collecting firewood. He returned therefrom at about 12 noon, but after taking his lunch again went back to the jungle. About 4 p. m. the Respondents went to the house of Mahadya and on learning that he had gone to jungle Respondents Visha and Daji brought him from the jungle on the pretext that they wanted to settle the quarrel. Thereafter Respondent no. 1 Visha with an iron rod, (it is specifically alleged that he assaulted Mahadya on his head) and the remaining Respondents with sticks assaulted Mahadya at a distance of about 30 paces from his house. After assaulting him they went away. As a consequence of the assault Mahadya fell on the ground. The assault on him was witnessed by his son Shanker P. W. 1, his sister-in-law Sakhibai @ Laxmibai P. W. 2 and his wife Rami P. W. 3. After the incident Shanker and others gave him water but he did not drink. Thereafter Shanker, his maternal uncle Laxman and others brought Mahadya to their house.

(3.) GOING backwards, it is manifest from the evidence of public panch Hari P. W. 5 that during the course of investigation Respondent no. 1 Visha Mohor and Respondent no. 2 Daji Mor stated that they could have the stick and iron rod, respectively, which they concealed in their house, recovered. Consequently, as is manifest from the recovery panchanama a stick and iron rod on the pointing out of Respondent no. 1 Visha Mohor and Respondent no. 2 Daji Mor, respectively, were recovered from the house of the said Respondents, on 15. 10. 85. It is pertinent to mention that the Investigating Officer, before whom the said Respondents had made the said disclosures and got the said articles recovered has not been examined by the prosecution.