STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PUNJAJI SITARAM TAYADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has preferred this appeal against the acquittal of the respondents for the offences punishable under sections 307/34, 324/34, 323/34, 147, 148, 149 of I.P.C. by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Buldana in Sessions Case No. 133/1991 by judgment dated 28.6.1996.

(2.) THE criminal prosecution was pending against respondent No.1 Punjaji Tayade and respondent No.5 Ramlal Tayade on the allegation that about 12 months before the present incident, they had assaulted PW1 Pandhari Bhagwan Tayade (the present complainant) with a knife. On 15.8.1991 in the morning after attending the flag hoisting ceremony, PW1 Pandhari was proceeding to his field. About 20-25 persons including the respondents prevented PW1 Pandhari by encircling him. Respondent No.1 Punjaji Tayade was holding an iron road. Respondents No.2 Shankar Shelke, No.3 Devidas Shelke, No.5 Ramlal Tayde and No.6 Sakharam Shelke were holding iron pipes and respondent No.4 Shrikrushna Tayde was holding a stick. PW1 Pandhari was assaulted. On hearing the commotion, his brother PW3 Pundlik Bhagwan Tayde and cousin PW4 Shriram Trambak Tayde rushed to the place of incident. They tried to save PW1 Pandhari. However, they were assaulted. PW1 Pandhari, PW3 Pundlik and PW4 Shriram were injured. The injured were taken to Buldana. PW1 Pandhari lodged oral report (Ex.56) at Police Station Buldana. On the basis of the said report, Crime No.0/1991 was registered. It was subsequently transferred to Police Station Dhamangaon Badhe where Crime No. 42/1991 under Sections 147, 148, 307 of IPC was registered against the respondents at Ex.81. PW1 Pandhari, PW3 Pundlik and PW4 Shriram were admitted to General Hospital, Buldana. PW7 Dr. Deshpande, Medical Officer, examined them. It was found that PW1 Pandhari sustained lacerated wounds, abrasion and contusions; PW3 Pundlik sustained contused lacerated wound and contusions and PW4 Shriram sustained contusions and abrasions. Accordingly medical certificates Exhs. 76, 74 and 75 respectively were issued. During the course of investigation, instruments used for beating were discovered at the instance of some of the respondents. After completion of investigation, the respondents were charge sheeted. Charge under sections 307/34, 324/34, 323/34, 147, 148, 149 of IPC was framed against the respondents. The respondents pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Their defence is of denial.

(3.) ON consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the trial Court found that the evidence of the injured witnesses is contradictory and is not trustworthy. The trial Court also found that the evidence of the injured is not corroborated by medical evidence. The trial Court, therefore, acquitted the respondents. The present appeal is directed against the said acquittal.