PUNDLIK LAXMAN CHAVAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been filed by the accused challenging his conviction under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life, by the learned Additional sessions Judge, Kolhapur by his judgment and order dated 5/1/1988 passed in Sessions Case No. 68/1987.

(2.) FEW facts in nutshell are as follows :-

(3.) THE trial Court has recorded a clear finding on appreciation of the entire evidence that Appellant has killed his daughter Renuka and the learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant conceded that the finding recorded is correct. However, in nutshell we are indicating the evidence on record so as to point out why we are agreeing with the trial Court. On record there is evidence of PW 2 Dhondiba Patil who is the Police patil of village Kadal and step-brother of Tanubai. He has deposed that he had seen the Appellant holding the head of Renuka in one hand and the sickle in another hand. He has deposed that the clothes of Appellant were smeared with blood and was caught. He had lodged FIR Exh. 21. This version was not challenged in the cross-examination. FIR says that appellant was seen holding head and sickle when he was returned from the field at 12-30. It is also mentioned that when he asked fhe Appellant about it, he did not reply. Then about his informing the others and catching of the Appellant. Then evidence of PW 3 Bhausaheb Patil who is the Police Patil of village Hasurwadi. He has also deposed about the seeing the Appellant holding the head in one hand and sickle in another and the Appellant was smeared with blood who was wearing bandi and pant. He has deposed that Subhana caught the Appellant and sickle was snatched. He has also deposed that Appellant did not speak when he was questioned about it. He has also stated that he had gone to ST bus station and went to Gadhinglaj Police Station. This version was also not challenged in the cross-examination. Then there is evidence of PW 4 Tanubai, she is wife of the Appellant, She has deposed that Appellant broke darshan from her neck on the date of inci dent and that Renuka was crying as she wanted to go to fair of deity Yellamma at village Kot. She has deposed that Appellant lifted Renuka by saying that she would be taken to the deity. Then she deposed that she has seen the Appellant holding the head of Renuka and that Appellant was caught by others and taken to Gadbinglaj Police Station. This version is also not challenged in the cross-examination. Then PW 5 Subhana Chavan is examined. He is the cousin of the Appellant. He has deposed that he caught right band of the Appellant in which he was holding the sickle. He snatched the sickle from his hand. The hands of the accused-Appellant were tied. At that time the Appellant was not speaking anything and said nothing except that he had cut and brought the head of his daughter. Nothing is there to disbelieve his evidence. Then there is panchanama at Exh. 8. It is in respect of clothes of Appellant and head of Renuka. Clothes of Appellant were blood stained and he was holding the head of daughter Renuka. Thev came to be seized along with the towel which was covering the head. At Exh 9 is panchanama in respect of attachment of sickle It shows that same was blood stained. At Exh. 10 inquest Panchanama showing that head of the dead body was removed from the rest of the body and there was big grievous injury. It also showed that there was clean cut injuries on the stomach and the intestines had come out. At Exh. 11 is a panchanama in respect of attachment of clothes and bangles of the deceased. At Exh. 33 is the report of the C. A. The report of C A. shows that blood which was on the frock of the girl, bandi and half pant of the Appellant was of O group. Similarly it shows that blade and handle of the sickle were blood-stained and also chappal of the Appellant. All this evidence clearly goes to show that the Appellant has killed his daughter Renuka.