DHANRAJ JAGO KOLI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this Appeal, the Appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 25-11-1994 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Sessions Case No. 62 of 1994, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter :

(2.) SHORTLY stated, the prosecution case runs as under. The informant Janabai Vedu Patil, P. W. 1, is the wife of the deceased Vedu Yeshwant Patil. They were married about 10 years prior to the incident and had two sons, namely, Sunil and Anil. At the time of the incident, Janabai, the deceased, her two sons, Adhar Koli, P. W. 3, Dwarka Patil, P. W. 5 and Rajasbai Patil, P. W. 6, used to live in village Hispur, taluka Sindkheda, district Dhule. Sometimes before the incident, the brother of Appellant Dhanraj died on account of poison being mixed in his liquor. Dhanraj had a feeling that it was the deceased who was responsible for it. Consequently, relations were strained between the Appellant Dhanraj and his wife, Appellant Ushabai, on one side and the deceased on the other. On account of the said enmity, at about 7 p. m. on 31-12-1993, Appellants Dhanraj and Ushabai, along with Appellant Jago Koli and juvenile accused Dnyaneshwar, came to the courtyard of the house of Adhar Koli, P. W. 3 and Dwarka Patil, P. W. 5. They felled down the deceased Vedu Yeshwant Patil on the ground, and thereafter, on the instigation of Appellant Jago, Appellant Dhanraj assaulted the deceased with a stone and juvenile accused Dnyaneshwar inflicted stick blows on him. Thereafter, Appellant Dhanraj asked Dnyaneshwar to bring a bullock cart and on the same, the Appellants took Vedu away. This incident was seen by Janabai, P. W. 1, Adhar Koli, P. W. 3, Dwarka Patil, P. W. 5 and Rajasbai Patil, P. W. 6. Thereafter, Janabai, P. W. 1, went to the house of her aunt, Rajasbai Patil, P. W. 6, but the latter asked her to go from her house. Consequently, she returned. Next morning, Janabai went to her parents' house in village Taradi. However, she did not inform her parents about the incident. About 10 days after the incident, i. e. on 10-1-1994, when H. C. Fahimoddin Karimoddin Sheikh, attached to Sindkheda Police Station, went to Hispur in connection with an inquiry pertaining to a case of accidental death of one Mudhukar Dayaram he heard a rumour that the Appellants and Dnyaneshwar had assaulted Vedu Yeshwant Patil and had taken him in a bullock cart to an unknown place. Consequently, he made an inquiry. H. C. Sheikh thereafter gave a report, Exhibit 51, to A. P. I. Punjaram Binnar, who directed him to make an inquiry from the wife of Yedu Yeshwant Patil. Therefore, the same day, i. e. , on 10-1-1994, H. C. Sheikh, along with two constables, made inquiry from Janabai, wife of Vedu Yeshwant Patil, and she disclosed to them the incident.

(3.) THE case was committed to the Court of Sessions in the usual manner, where the Appellants were charged for an offence punishable under sections 302 and 201, both read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, to which charges they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, in all the prosecution examined 11 witnesses. Four of them, namely, Janabai, P. W. 1, Adhar Koli, P. W. 3, Dwarka Patil, P. W. 5 and Rajasbai Patil, P. W. 6, were examined as eye witnesses. THE learned trial Judge believed the evidence of eye witnesses and also the recovery evidence on the pointing out of Appellant Dhanraj and convicted and sentenced the Appellants in the manner stated in paragraph 1. Hence this Appeal.