PUNDLIK LAXMAN DHOKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri. Daga, learned Counsel for the appellant, and Smt. Jog, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

(2.) THE criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated10.6.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Session Trial No. 16/1998 whereby appellant/accused in convicted for the offence punishable under Section302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of rupees one thousand, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. THE material particulars of the prosecution case, in nutshell, are as follows :

(3.) SHRI. Daga further states that it has come in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses that at the relevant time, they had seen a scuffle between the accused and deceased,which indicates that the accused was not the aggressor. Otherwise, accused could have inflicted injuries on the person of deceased, who at the relevant time, according to the prosecution, was asleep and scuffle could not have taken place. It is submitted that deceased wanted to assault the accused and, therefore, scuffle had taken place between them and during the said scuffle, deceased caused injuries on the person of accused. It is contended that the trial Court completely ignored this aspect of the matter and wrongly held that the prosecution succeeded in proving the case against the accused for the offence punishable under Section302 of Indian Penal Code. It is further contended that in the instant case, prosecution has failed to explain the injuries caused to the accused and, therefore, suppressed the genesis of the quarrel. Therefore, accused is entitled to get benefit in this regard.