SHIODAS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Appeal, accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Sessions Trial No. 23 of 1988 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Bhandara, Challenge their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and the sen tence of imprisonment for life awarded to them. Though there was also a charge against accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code for causing hurt to Saibai (PW 5) the mother of deceased - he was acquitted of the said charge.

(2.) PROSECUTION case as revealed, in brief, is that on 26-1-1988, at about 9. 00 p. m. , when the deceased Vasanta was at dinner he picked up a quarrel with his wife Prabhawati and started abusing her. At that time accused No. 2, wife of 1st accused, came to the house of the deceased and asked him as to why he was abusing her, to which the deceased stated that it was not she whom he was abusing but he was abusing only his wife. Not satisfied with the said answer, the 2nd accused pulled Vasanta to the Court yard and by that time the 1st accused, husband of 2nd accused, also reached there. A scuffle took place and the 1st accused required the 2nd accused to bring an axe-Article 4-from their house with which the 1st accused dealt a blow with the blade portion of the axe on the head of Vasanta. On receiving the same Vasanta fell. He was removed to the hospital; from there PW 5 Saibai proceeded to the police station and tendered Ex. 43 on the basis of which a crime was registered under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code. Vasanta expired on the next day. On receipt of said information, Section 324 was altered into Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) ON committal, the learned Sessions Judge, framed the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against both the accused and also under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code against accused No. 1. The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of occurrence witnesses, namely PW 1, PW 2, PW 4, PW 5 and PW 7, to bring home guilt to the accused persons. The prosecution also relied on the confession of 1st accused (Ex. 48) pursuant to which Article 3 was recovered as per Ex. 49.