BABUJI CHANDRARAO YEDLA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard rival arguments on this Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant/orig.accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 16.12.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No.460 of 2002.

(2.) The appellant/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to suffer RI for three months. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500, in default to suffer further RI for three months.

(3.) The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is as under : Complainant Deepak Patil was a contractor who had taken the contract of cutting grass in various units of Aarey Colony area of Mumbai. He had employed ten labourers for cutting of grass. It was Government awarded contract. The labourers were attending the duty from 6:00 a.m. till noon time. He was doing the job with the help of his another partner by name Tayyappa (PW4). Said PW4 was also attending the site at Aarey Colony in the morning. On 17.12.2001, PW1 Deepak and his partner went to the work at 7:00 a.m. at Aarey Colony area. At about 9:30 a.m. one worker by name Silvraj came to him and told regarding finding of some blood stains beneath one tree. Search was conducted around that place and the dead body of the victim was found. There were injury marks on the head and neck and the assault was apparently by means of sharpedged weapon. Said dead body was subsequently identified by PW2 Rohit Kamble as that of one Nagraj. On noticing the dead body, PW1 lodged complaint with Aarey Colony SubPolice Station against unknown assailants. Investigation in the matter was started. During which spot panchnama and inquest panchnama was conducted. During the investigation, name of the present appellant/accused was revealed and he was put under arrest on 21.12.2001. Statement of various witnesses were recorded including the statement of PW3 Shanmugam a watchman working with PW1 & PW4. According to said PW3 Shanmugam he had seen the victim and the appellant/accused playing card in the area contracted out to PW1 for cutting grass. According to PW3 Shanmugam (a watchman) he had censored both the persons not to play cards at that place. He found that on the evening of 16.12.2001 they were playing cards and by their side one country made kerosene lamp was ignited.