DIGAMBAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, Dist.Ahmednagar dtd. 8/2/2018 thereby convicting appellant for offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and thereby sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine, instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

(2.) Shrirampur Taluka Police Station chargesheeted appellant for offence under Sec. 302 of the IPC on the premise that on 20/12/2015 between 04:00 p.m. to 04:30 p.m. accused appellant came to the field of deceased Rajendra and demanded extra saplings from him. When deceased refused, quarrel took place and thereafter, appellant mounted attack on deceased by means of wooden handle of spade. He also used the handle for pressing neck of deceased Rajendra. Deceased was shifted to hospital where Doctor examined and declared him dead.

(3.) The sum and substance of submissions advanced by learned Counsel for appellant is that here even if case of prosecution is considered as it is, according to him, it is not a case attracting charge under Sec. 302 of the IPC. He pointed out that there was no premeditation or motive or even intention to kill deceased. That going by very story of prosecution, occurrence has taken place as a result of sudden quarrel which took place on the spur of the moment at the spot. Accused had not been armed and he has rather used wooden handle of agricultural implement. Therefore, under such circumstances, charge framed itself was misplaced, erroneous. Secondly, he would point out that infact here there is no eye witness. Some information is alleged to be passed to informant that too on telephone and on the basis of hearsay information, crime has been registered. He pointed out that surprisingly there was no bleeding injury, but shirt of deceased is shown to be blood stained. He also pointed out that initially occurrence was reported as AD and therefore, very genesis of occurrence has not been established by prosecution. Recovery is also at a belated stage.