KASHINATH MAHIPAL GAIKWAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Sessions Case No. 7 of 1980, Sessions Court, Nasik, accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were convicted of offences punishable under section 302 and section 323 read with section 34 of the Penal Code. For the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34, they were sentenced to suffer like imprisonment and for the offence punishable under section 323 read with section 34, they were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the said sentences were directed to run concurrently. The original accused No. 4 was acquitted of all the charges levelled against him. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were also acquitted of the charge of offences punishable under section 341 and section 504 read with section 34 of the Penal Code. It is against their conviction and sentence under section 302 read with section 34 as also their conviction under section 323 read with section 34 that the original accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have preferred this appeal.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case has been thus : Accused No. 1 is the father of accused Nos. 2 and 3. It is a family of agriculturists residing at village Khamgaon in Nasik district. Deceased Govind and his father Rajaram (P.W. 6) are also from a family of agriculturists residing in the same village. Lands of the two families were adjacent to each other. Some disputes were existing between the two families in relation to bandh and water. On the morning at about 7 a.m. of 13th September, 1979, Rajaram and his son Govind had gone to their field to watch the crop and scare away birds. The accused had also that time gone to their own field. They had with them sticks and an axe. Case of the prosecution is that accused No. 1 picked up a quarrel with Rajaram and Govind and hurled abuses at them. Subsequently, accused No. 3 held Govind. Later accused No. 2 gave a blow on the head of Govind with the blunt and back side of the axe in his hand. Accused No. 3 gave a stick blow on the arm of Rajaram. The injured Govind went to the medical dispensary. His father Rajaram lodged an N.C. Complaint at about 9 a.m. with the Yeola Taluka Police Station under sections 323, 504 and 506 of the Penal Code. From the medical dispensary the injured Govind was sent to the Civil Hospital at Nasik. He, however, succumbed to his injury at about five in the evening of the next day 1st September, 1979. After the death of Govind, offence was registered against the accused persons inter alia under section 302 of the Penal Code. After completion of investigation, the accused were charge-sheeted to stand their trial for offenced punishable under sections 302, 323, 341 and 504 read with section 34 of the Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge who tried the accused passed the respective orders of their conviction and sentence as also of acquittal as already stated hereinabove.

(3.) The State has not chosen to file any appeal against the acquittal of accused No. 4 nor has the State filed any appeal against the acquittal of accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the charges under sections 341 and 504 read with section 34 of the Penal Code. This appeal by original accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 thus concerns their conviction and sentence under section 302 read with section 34 as also section 323 read with section 34 of the Penal Code.