KISAN BHAMTYA PAWARA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant appeal, by invoking Sec. 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [Cr.P.C.], the appellant is taking exception to the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada in Sessions Case No. 55 of 2014 which was passed on 17/10/2015 thereby holding accused guilty for the offence punishable under Ss. 302, 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) PW8 Rehama had an affair with Lakdya Ohlya Pawara, who is nephew of accused. Because of said affair, Rehama married Lakdya as per customs and rituals prevailing in their community. Husband and father-in-law of informant Bonibai [PW2] i.e. mother of Rehama had opposed said marriage. Resultantly, Rehama was not sent to cohabit with Lakdya. Accused was insisting for sending Rehama back to cohabit with his nephew Lakdya and according to prosecution, at times he used to issue threats. On 7/6/2014, PW2 Bonibai was present in the house along with her father-in-law Arshya. Accused Kisan visited the house of informant. He was holding dengara (wooden stick). Initially he started abusing and questioning Arshya as to why Rehama was not sent to cohabit. Deceased Arshya allegedly told him that said marriage between Rehama and Lakdya is not acceptable. Getting annoyed by the same, appellant Kisan assaulted Arshya on head with dengara, as a result of which, he collapsed. He had sustained bleeding injury. He had died on the spot and therefore occurrence was reported to Mhasawad Police Station, on the strength of which crime no. 34 of 2014 was registered. After investigation, police filed challan. On committal of case, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada conducted trial. After appreciating oral and documentary evidence on behalf of prosecution, learned trial Judge accepted the case of prosecution and held that charges are proved and thereby convicted and sentenced appellant-accused for above offences.

(3.) According to learned Advocate for the appellant, there is apparently false implication. It is submitted that there is no direct eye witness and evidence of PW2 Bonibai [informant] is full of contradictions, omissions, material improvements. Learned Advocate submitted that there are allegations of assault by means of weapon stick [dengara] and therefore, by no means said article can be said to be deadly weapon. He would submit that according to the informant, deceased had taken meals at around 8.30 p.m., whereas, autopsy doctor has found that there was semi digested food. Taking into account alleged time of occurrence and above said evidence of autopsy doctor, it is impossible to accept the version of PW2 Bonibai about occurrence being taken place in the night of 7/6/2014 at 8.30 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. He invited our attention to para 3 of the examination-in-chief of PW2 Bonibai wherein she has deposed about seeing accused in the light of torch, and would submit that this fact was not stated by her in the FIR. He also invited our attention to the answer given by PW2 Bonibai in para 7 of her cross wherein she has admitted that accused had no relations with Lakdya and Ohlya and thus further submitted that there is no motive behind alleged occurrence.