RAMCHANDRA SITARAM DHARMIK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, Ramchandra Sitaram Dharmik was tried for murder of Ranirao Borkute under section 302 of the Indian Penal code in Sessions Case No. 233 of 1998. The learned III Additional Sessions judge, Nagpur, by judgment and order dated 18-11-1998, convicted the appellant for offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. This order of conviction and sentence is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) THE incident which gave rise to this prosecution against the appellant took place on 25-12-1997 at the shop of victim Ramrao Borkute at about 1800 hours at Bajaj Nagar which comes under Police Station, Ambazari, Nagpur city. The complainant Ramrao Borkute, since deceased, was working in his cobbler shop at Bajaj Nagar. The appellant was keeping his bed in the shop of complainant. However, deceased did not like the same and, therefore, he asked the appellant not to keep his bed in his shop and there used to be quarrel between them on that issue some days prior to the occurrence. It is the prosecution case that on the day of occurrence, it was Ramrao Borkute asked the appellant not to keep his bed in the shop for which the appellant was insisting. It appears that as the deceased asked the appellant not to keep his bed in the shop, the appellant felt very bad and he lifted a stone which was used by the deceased in his shop in connection with his business and assaulted the deceased on his head, right ear, nose and forehead. Due to that assault, deceased received multiple injuries on his head. The appellant ran away from the spot. The injured was admitted to Taori Hospital, where he was examined by Dr. Girdhar Taori (P. W. 10), He noted multiple injuries on the person of deceased as described in case summary (Exh. 26 ). He also advised to remove the deceased to Medical College Hospital. When he was shifted to medical College Hospital, his statement was recorded by police vide Exh. 30 and on the basis of that, offence was registered under section 307 of the indian Penal Code. However, injured Ramrao died in the hospital and hence, the offence was converted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was arrested. The investigation was carried out by P. S. I. Jaiulabettin sheikh (P. W. 14) who was then attached to Police Station, Ambazari. He prepared inqest panchanama (Exh. 15) and the dead body was sent for postmortem examination. Dr. Vinod Agrawal (P. W. 13) conducted autopsy on the dead body of victim Ramrao and prepared postmortem notes (Exh. 34 ). In his opinion, the cause of death was due to Intracranial Haemorrhage due to head injury. Further investigation in the matter was carried out by Vasant sayyam (P. W. 15) who was then Police Inspector attached to Police Station, Ambazari. He prepared spot panchanama (Exh. 9 ). The articles which were found on the spot were seized under seizure memo (Exh. 10 ). The seized articles include two stones on which blood stains were found. The seized articles were sent to Chemical Analyser. As per the report (Exh. 39)of Chemical Analyser, blood detected on the stone was human blood. However, blood group of the blood detected cannot be determined as the results were inconclusive. As per the report (Exh. 39), blood detected on the clothes of the deceased was of group 'o'. As per the report (Exh. 39) of the chemical Analyser, human blood is detected in nail clippings of the appellant. However, blood group of the blood detected in the nail clippings of the accused could not be determined. After completing investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate who, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Session.

(3.) BEFORE the Sessions Court, the appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge and also claimed to be tried. His defence is that of total denial. At the trial, the prosecution examined in all 15 witnesses including Sakharam Sahare (P. W. 2), who claimed to be an eye-witness to the incident, Punjaji Dharne (P. W. 1), who was panch witness and in whose presence spot panchanama (Exh. 9) and seizure memo (Exh. 10) came to be prepared, Ashok Lohage (P. W. 3) who also claimed to be an eye-witness to the incident, Babarao Dhotre (P. W. 4), a panch witness in whose presence an inquest panchanama (Exh. 15) was prepared, Rajesh Dharmik (P. W. 5), who is son of the appellant and did not support the prosecution case though the prosecution claims him to be an eye-witness to the incident, Milind Dhotre (P. W. 6), a witness who claims that the victim Ramrao while in the hospital told him that the appellant assaulted him by means of stone as he (Victim Ramrao) did not allow the appellant to keep his bed in his shop, Babulal Matale (P. W. 8), who acted as panch when the clothes of the appellant came to be seized under panchanama (Exh. 21), dr. Girdhar Taori (P. W. 10), who first examined the victim Ramrao and referred him to Medical College and Hospital, Bholaram Shende (P. W. 11), head Constable was attached to Police Station, Ambazai, and who recorded the statement (Exh. 30 of the victim in the hospital, Dr. . Haribhau Kupate (P. W. 12), who examined the victim and certified that he was conscious when his statement was recorded, Dr. Vinod Agrawal (P. W. 13), who conducted autopsy on the dead body of victim Ramrao and P. I. Vasant Sayyam (P. W. 15), who carried further investigation in the matter. The learned additional Sessions Judge, accepting the evidence of the eye-witnesses coupled with the statement of the deceased (Exh. 30) and medical evidence and the incriminating circumstances as to finding of human blood as per the report of Chemical Analyzer (Exh. 39), came to the conclusion that the victim Ramrao died homicidal death and that it was on account of assault by the appellant with stone causing multiple severe injuries. In keeping with these findings, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded him to sentence for imprisonment of life.