PATIRAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Daga, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Fulzele, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

(2.) THE appellant-accused has challenged the judgment and finding of conviction recorded by the trial Court in the present appeal for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) MR. Daga, learned counsel, contended that in the instant case the prosecution has examined eleven prosecution witnesses. However, the material witnesses are Istari Sakharwade (PW-1), the father of the deceased, Shankar (PW-2), who claims to be an eye-witness to the incident, and is the elder brother of the deceased Someshwar, Smt. Lalitabai (PW-3), the mother of the deceased, Smt. Gopikabai (PW-4), another eye-witness, and Dr. Gopal (PW-8 ). It is contended that the other witnesses, i. e. , Pisharam (PW-5) and Dnyaneshwar (PW-6) are the Panch witnesses examined by the prosecution in order to prove seizure of clothes of accused, Spot Panchanama, Inquest Panchanama respectively. Janba (PW-7) is a witness who tried to get an ambulance to carry the injured to the hospital. Gangadhar (PW-9) is the Police Constable, who had carried the axe to the Medical Officer for obtaining his opinion. Mahendraraj (PW-10) is Asstt. Police Inspector, who has registered the First Information Report (Exh. 31) and thereafter handed over the investigation to Rajendra (PW-11), who is Police Sub-Inspector and the Investigating Officer in the present case.