JANAK KHEMSINGH MARAKAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Daga, learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri Patel, learned A. P. P. for the respondent-State.

(2.) THIS appeal impugns the judgment and order passed by the IVth additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, on 12-9-1997 in Sessions Trial No. 360 of 1996, by which the present appellant Janak Khemsingh Marakam, is convicted for the offence under section 302 of I. P. C. and sentenced, to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer R. I. for six months.

(3.) THE relevant facts of prosecution case are as follows: (a)That the deceased Jyoti Nerkar was a young girl aged about 15 years. It is a prosecution case that the present accused Janak used to harass the deceased Jyoti. According to P. W. 2 Shobhabai, who is the mother of the deceased, the accused had followed her daughter twice in day time and once in the night time and had been required to be warned that if he harassed jyoti, the matter would be reported to the police. (b)On the date of the incident i. e. on 25-4-1996, the deceased Jyoti along with P. W. 3 Hemlata Tembhare had been to the field of one Dhondbaji Bhoyar at about 3. 00 p. m. for plucking chilly. While they were in the process of plucking chilly, the accused Janak came to the said field armed with an axe. He passed from the side of Jyoti and gave a blow of an axe on the head of jyoti. He gave 2-3 blows of the axe and ran away from the spot. Jyoti fell down after receiving a bleeding injury to her head. P. W. 3 Hemlata went running to the field of one Umaji Anjankar P. W. 1. In the field of Umaji, the mother of the deceased Jyoti by name Shobhalbai (P. W. 2) was working. Hemlata told shobhabai that the accused Janak had killed her daughter Jyoti. The mother of Jyoti, Shobhabai rushed to the spot and on seeing her dead daughter, she started crying. People gathered at the spot. Amongst these people, who gathered there was also P. W. 1 Umaji Anjankar. According to Umaji Anjankar, p. W. 2 Shobhabai was working in his field and at that time P. W. 3 Hemlata came shouting "shobhabai dhao, tujha mulila Janak ne marie!'. He further stated that Hemlata had disclosed that the deceased Jyoti was beated by an axe. This witness followed Shobhabai after about five minutes and found jyoti dead in the chillypods on the field of Dhondabaji Bhoyar. He found that there was injury to her head and her mother was crying by taking the head of her daughter on her thigh. He names villagers such as Yadavrao Bhoyar, morba Shriram Thakare and Damu Dahikar as being present at that time. This witness then went back to his house where he had access to his personal telephone and at about 5. 15 p. m. he informed Khaparkheda Police Station about the incident. (c)The telephone call was taken at the Khaparkheda Police Station by p. W. 9 Rajendra Upadhyaya. After making an entry in the station diary, P. S. I. Rajendra Upadhyay went along with his staff to the place of incident. He found the deceased Jyoti lying on the field with head injury. He prepared an inquest panchanama (Ex. 12) and obtained the signature of the ponchos thereon. He then recorded the statement of P. W. 1 Umaji Anjankar. The P. S. I. Rajendra then kept P. S. I. Ande on the spot for preparing spot panchanama and returned to the Police Station to register the crime. The printed F. I. R. indicates that the crime was registered at 6. 48 p. m. on that day. P. S. I. Rajendra then returned to the scene of the incident and recorded the statements of p. W. 2 Shobhabai and P. W. 4 Gunwantrao on 25-4r1996 itself. He thereafter sent the dead body of Jyoti to Mayo Hospital, Nagpur, for post-mortem and recorded the statements of some more witnesses. (d)On 26-4-1996, P. W. 8 Prakash Mohite conducted post-mortem on the body of deceased Jyoti. He found an external injury on her head being a lacerated wound over left parital region eminence of size 5 cm. x 4 cm. cavity deep with underlying bone fracture. He found the underlined dura torn and the brain matter was also crushed into pieces. On internal ex-amination, he found haematoma under scalp present in right front parital region in an area of 8 cm. x 7 cm. (e)On 26-4-1996, P. W. 9 arrested the present accused under an arrest panchanama (Exh. 52 ). He seized the clothes of the accused in presence of the ponchos under the Seizure panchanama (Exh. 53 ). (f)On 1 -5-1996, the accused made a statement in the presence of panchas that he was ready to produce an axe which he had concealed. Accordingly, p. W. 9 P. S. I. Rajendra prepared a memorandum panchanama. Thereafter, the accused took the police party to the field of one Anandrao Anjankar from where he took out an axe concealed under a mango tree. This axe was seized under a seizure panchanama. (g)On 17-6-1996, the Investigating Officer, sent the axe under his covering letter to P. W. 8 Dr. Mohite of Mayo Hospital, Nagpur, for his opinion as to whether the injury he had mentioned in the post-mortem could be caused with the axe. On the same day, P. W. 8 Dr. Mohite, after examining the weapon, concluded that blood like stains were present over blade joint and surrounding bamboo near joint. He advised sending of the weapon for Chemical Analyser. He also clearly opined that the injury mentioned at Column No. 17 of the post-mortem notes was possible with that part of blade which formed joint and if used with substantial force. (h) On 1-7-1996, the Investigating Officer then sent the axe with the covering letter for Chemical Analysis. (i) On 5-2-1997, the Chemical Analyser sent his report relating to the axe concluding that no blood was found on the axe. (j) On 27-6-1997, the Chemical Analyser sent his reports relating to other articles including the clothes of the accused and clothes and articles worn by the deceased Jyoti as also in respect of blood of Jyoti, the nail clipping, scalp hair and vaginal swab. Insofar as the clothes of accused are concerned, no blood stains were found on the shirt of the accused but one blood stain of. 2 cm diameter was found on the left leg middle back portion of his pant, (k) After completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the charge-sheet. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and after recording of evidence, the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the accused as aforesaid came to be passed.