MARUTI SHAMRAO WADKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 23rd March, 2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No. 85 of 1999 wherein the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R. I. for six months on first count and to suffer R. I. for six months on second count.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present case, in short, are thus-

(3.) THE appellant accused is from village Sangwade. Witness Sushila happens to his wife. She got married about 10 years prior to the incident. Before marriage they had love affair. During the wedlock she gave birth to son viz. Dadasaheb. She was married to the accused against the wishes of the members of her family, and therefore, they were not on talking terms with them for about two years. About two years prior to the incident the appellant started ill-treating Sushila and therefore, she had gone to her parental home on two occasions. On first time she was taken back by the accused after giving guarantee of two respectable person. However, ill treatment was continued and she again returned to her parental home, but again the appellant accused gave guarantee of employer and she went to reside the accused. However, one month prior to the incident, the accused again started ill treating her and therefore she left his house along with son and took shelter at her parental home. At that time she had sustained fracture injury on her leg and was treated in the hospital at Kolhapur. Thereafter, she was working with her brother Prakash, the complainant, who used to take contracts of digging well. The incident took place on 9-3-1999. Witness Sushila had gone to the field of one Nerlekar near Sangwade. Her nephew Pravin and brother Bhimrao were also accompanying her for the work of digging of well. At about 5. 00 p. m. accused also came in that field and asked Sushila about his son and accordingly Sushila sent her sons Dadasaheb towards the accused. After finishing the work of well, Sushila insisted that accused to hand over custody of dadasaheb to her. Thereafter Sushila alongwith her brother Prakash and nephew and another brother Bhimrao and one worker started for Sangwade. They were followed by accused alongwith son Dadasaheb. When, they all had been in the field of one Lakani, accused handed over custody of Dadasaheb to sushila. Later on brother of Sushila complainant Prakash asked accused not to come on the well and not to ask for custody of child, on which accused snatched away his son from Sushila and went at a distance of 15ft. towards back side. Thereafter he caused Dadasaheb to stand and held him in hand and thereafter gave knife blow on Dadasaheb. When Sushila and her brother prakash rushed towards him, in the meantime accused gave another blow of knife on Dadasaheb. Thereafter the accused stabbed himself but complainant prakash snatched away the knife from him. Thereafter Sushila started to go to sangawade along with her son Dadasaheb. The accused was also followed them in injured condition. The matter was reported to Dy. Sarpanch witness Charudatta paul, who went to the police Patil and informed the fact to him and then also informed the Karvir Police Station. Thereafter police arrived in the village. The police found that the appellant was lying in the injured condition in front of house of one Sarjerao Kashimbane and son Dadasaheb was also dead and was found with him. Injured accused was immediately shifted to G. P. R. Hospital, Kolhapur. Thereafter complainant Prakash's complaint was recorded by the police an offence under sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. The investigation commenced, in which course the inquest panchnama was made and dead body was sent for post mortem examination. The panchnama of scene of incident was prepared. The knife which was snatched by complainant Prakash from accused along with shirt of complainant Prakash which was stained with blood was also seized under panchnama. Sushila's clothes were also having blood stains and those were seized at that time. The incriminating articles seized in the course of investigation were sent to Chemical Analyser for examination, whose report was received and is part of record. Statement of several witnesses came to be recorded, including eye-witness to the incident. On completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was sent to the Court of law. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions.