TULSHIRAM NARAYAN PARDHI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellant-original accused against the judgment and order dated 13.9.2011 passed by the learned Extra Joint Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Sessions Case No. 22 of 2009. By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC for causing death of his mother Kashabai, his sister-in-law Sulabai and his uncle Budha. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence under section 324 of IPC for causing injuries to P.W. 1 Kacharu with a 'Kudal' (pick-axe). For the offence under Section 302 of IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default R.I. for one year. For the offence under Section 324 of IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default R.I. for three months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as under:

(2.) Charge came to be framed against the appellant under sections 302, 307, 323, 324 and 506 of IPC. The appellant-accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. The defence of the appellant is that of total denial and false implication. Further defence raised on behalf of the appellant is that the appellant was suffering from insanity at the time of incident and he caused death of the three persons Kashabai, Sulabai and Budha and injuries to Kacharu during a bout of insanity. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated in para 1 above. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) We have heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that the appellant assaulted Kashabai, Sulabai and Budha and caused their death and in the course of the said incident, he also assaulted Kacharu with 'Kudal' and caused injuries to him. However, after carefully considering the matter and for the reasons stated herein below, we are of the opinion that this appeal deserves to be allowed.