BHIMA Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present appeal, the appellant, Bhima Alam challenges the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli in Sessions Trial No. 43/1996 thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and awarding sentence to suffer imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs. 200/ - in default R.I. for 15 days.

(2.) THE prosecution case can be summarized as follow:

(3.) PER contra, Shri Ghodeswar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the witnesses are most natural and trustworthy witnesses. He submits that their presence on the spot was a natural consequence. He further submits that the version of P.W. 5 Rambai, who is an eye witness to the incident, stood the test of cross -examination and her version cannot be thrown on account of being an interested witness. He further states that the weapon used in commission of crime was handed over by an independent eye witness who intervened in the incident so as to save the victim. Therefore, it is an additional circumstance to the version of eye witness in favour of the prosecution is the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor prayed for dismissal of the present appeal.