PRAVIN NARAYAN PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-original accused No. 1 in Sessions case No. 144 of 1998 has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, whereby the accused was convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. The accused was also convicted under section 37 (1) read with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay fine of rs. 50/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under : complainant Sujit Balkrishna Patil (P. W. 1) is a cousin brother of the deceased Kishor Jagannath Patil and witness Sameer Abhimanyu Patil (P. W. 5). All of them were residing at Village Sarde, Taluka Uran. The complainant's sister Smt. Pushpalata Laxman Patil was serving as a Sevika in Anganwadi. On the day prior to the incident, accused No. 5 Jeevan Chhagan Patil had told pushpalata that she was not capable of serving in the said Anganwadi and, on that count, there was some dispute between them. However, the same was settled.

(3.) On 29-1-1998 at about 3. 15 P. M. , when the complainant Sujit Patil (P. W. 1) was proceeding towards Radha-Krishna Temple, accused No. 1-Pravin patil was cleaning the space in front of his stall. After seeing the complainant proceeding in that direction, accused No. 1 told the mother of accused No. 5 that he would be deposing in favour of her son. When the complainant heard the same, he asked accused No. 1 as to why he was speaking about the quarrel when everything was settled on the previous day. On so saying, accused No. 1 gave a blow with a broom, which was in his hand, on the forehead of the complainant. The complainant, therefore, started proceeding towards his house. At that very time, his mother, Kishor Patil and Samir Patil were coming in that direction. The complainant narrated the incident to them. Hence all of them went to the mother of the deceased Kishor to ask her as to why her son behaved accordingly. However, she started abusing them. Hence all of them proceeded towards the stall of the deceased Kishor Patil. By that time, accused No. 1 came from the opposite side. He was holding one knife in the right hand and other in the left hand. After seeing Kishor, he asked as to why they brought Kishor. On so saying, accused No. 1 gave blows with the knives which were in his hands, on the chest and stomach as well as on the hand of the deceased Kishor. On that Kishor ran towards the house of Jayram Patil and sat there. The complainant and Sameer patil then took the injured Kishor to the Police Station. Finding that Kishor had sustained grievous injuries, he was immediately sent to Indira Gandhi Primary health Centre, Uran. The doctor on duty, namely, Dr. Balasaheb Sambhajirao sonawane (P. W. 6) examined him and found that the knife had stuck in his body. He, therefore, removed the said knife and handed over the same to the Police. He also started giving treatment to the injured Kishor. By that time, P. S. I. Jibram mahadu Mahajan (P. W. 10) reached to the hospital. He asked doctor Sonawane (P. W. 6) as to whether the injured Kishor was in a position to give statement. When Dr. Sonawane told him that the injured was in a position to give statement, p. S. I. Mahajan (P. W. 10) recorded the statement of Kishor in the presence of Dr. Sonawane (P. W. 6) and also obtained the necessary endorsement. Thereafter kishor was removed to Sion Hospital where he died at midnight. In the meantime, the complainant went to the Police Station and filed a complaint. It was registered at C. R. No. 17/1998 for the offences punishable under sections 307, 504 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Police also attached the knife (Article 1) , which was taken out by the doctor from the body of Kishor. The Police then visited the place of offence and drew the Panchanama and recorded statements of other witnesses and arrested Pravin (present appellant) on 3-2-1998. When the accused Pravin was in Police custody, he made a statement that he would point out the clothes on his person and accordingly the Police drew the memorandum and then the accused led Police and the Panchas near a culvert from where he produced the clothes. The Police attached the said clothes under the Panchanama. In the meantime, the Police had also obtained the post-mortem report. The Police then sent the attached property to the Chemical Analyser. After obtaining the chemical Analyser's report and completing the investigation, Police submitted charge-sheet against accused Nos. 1 to 6 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First class, Uran for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 504 of the Indian penal Code and section 37 (1) read with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.