MUKINDA RAMA KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant and four others were tried for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 302 and 452 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "ipc"). Learned Ilnd Ad hoc Additional sessions Judge acquitted all the accused of the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 325 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code. He further acquitted accused Nos. 2 to 5 of the offences punishable under sections 302 and 452 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant, is, however convicted of the offence punishable under sections 302 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. For the first offence the appellant is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/ -. For the second offence, he is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ -. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that complainant-Dashrath (PW 8) , murlidhar, Chandrakant @ Kant, Pandurang and Ankush (PW 4) are sons of ranubai Maruti Kamble (PW 6). Ranubai lives with Ankush, his wife Sanjivani (PW 10) and their three months old child Vishnu @ Vikki (since deceased). A plot of land is allotted by the Government to Ankush who is physically handicapped. The brothers are living separately at village Nalegaon. Pandurang is living in the old house at the village; others are living at the new settlement behind the Primary Health Centre. Their houses are adjacent to each other, by the side of road going towards Siddheshwar Temple. To the north of the house of ankush are the houses of Dashrath, Murdlidhar and Chandrakant. House of dnyanoba Nivrutti Kamble (accused No. 5) is opposite the house of Ankush, on the other side of the road. At the time of the incident construction of the house of ankush was in progress. Therefore, PW 4 was living in a temporary tin-shed constructed on the plot of Chandrakant. Soil excavated for the construction of the compound wall was heaped by the side of the road. This was the cause of dispute between PW 4 and accused No. 5, PW 4 had promised to remove the soil after the construction is completed up to plinth level but the members of the family of accused No. 5 were quarrelling with him because of the inconvenience caused to them.

(3.) On 29th January, 2004 at about 1. 00 p. m. Bayjabai, sister of PW 4, had come to the house of PW 4 with her son Narayan (PW 7). At about 2. 00 p. m. accused came to the house of PW 4. Accused No. 5 was armed with knife, mukunda (accused No. 1) , Sanjay (accused No. 2) and Ashok (accused No. 4) were armed with sticks and Shantabai (accused No. 3) was carrying stone. All of them started quarrelling over dumping of the soil by the side of the road. When pw 6 asked them not to quarrel, accused No. 5 inflicted knife blow on her right hand. PW 8 and PW 7 went to her rescue. Accused No. 4 dealt blows on the legs of PW 7 with stick, accused No. 2 dealt stick blows to PW 8 and accused No. 3 threw stones at Dattu son of Chandrakant, causing injuries to his legs. On account of fear, PW 4 and his wife had taken shelter in the tin-shed constructed on the plot of Chandrakant with their son Vikki. The accused pelted stones at the tin-shed. Thereafter, they went to his house, removed some of the galvanized iron sheets of the house with the help of sticks and stones and entered the house for assaulting PW 4 and his wife. Appellant obstructed PW 10 while she was leaving the house with her son and dealt stick blows over the head of the child saying that he would destroy the progeny of PW 4. Sahadeo Baburao Kamble (PW 5) and several others intervened to stop the quarrel. The child was then taken to the primary Health Centre. Dr. Madhav Shinde (PW 9) examined the child at 2. 10 p. m. and advised that he should be taken to the District Hospital at Latur. He examined PW 7. PW 6 Datta and PW 8 between 3. 30 to 3. 50 p. m. PW 8 lodged report of the incident with Chakur Police at 6. 00 p. m. On the basis of this report, head Constable Koli (PW 12) registered offence against the accused for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 307 and 452 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. He, then, visited the scene of occurrence and prepared Panchnama (Exh. 69). The child expired at about 8. 00 p. m. After death of the child, Dr. Sanjay Warad (PW 2) performed post-mortem. The child had sustained diffused contusion on left parieto-temporal region on scalp and diffused contusion on right parieto-temporal region. The tissues at the site of both the injuries were bruised. The child had also suffered communicated fracture of right parietal bone. After performing the internal and external examination, PW 2 found that the death was caused due to the head injury. In view of the death of the child, Penal section was changed from 307 to 302 of the Indian Penal Code and investigation was taken over by API Telang (PW 11). On the next day, PW 11 attached clothes of the deceased under Panchanama (Exh. 28) , collected post-mortem report (Exh. 29) , arrested accused Nos. 1 to 4 and recorded statements of the witnesses. Accused No. 5 was arrested on 31-1-2004. On 3-2-2004, accused no. 5 made a confessional statement (Exh. 34) in presence of Jaykumar (PW 3) and produced three sticks and a knife from his house. These weapons were attached under Panchanama (Exh. 35). After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was filed against the accused. The accused adopted defence of false implication.