VISHWAS NAMDEO FASE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur against the appellant under sections 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for having murdered one mujib Ayub Patharwat. He has also been convicted of the offence punishable under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and payment of fine for assaulting three persons who are prosecution witnesses in this case.

(2.) The complainant's sisters Vandana and Nandana had to often endure the appellant's eve teasing. They had to face the wolf whistles and obscene gestures of the appellant. On 9-7-1999, Vinayak, PW1 had accompanied his sister vandana for securing admission to college. When he returned home, he learnt from his parents that the small child of the brother of the appellant had gone under a handcart. The mother of the appellant who was known to the family of vinayak requested Nandana who was at home to bring the child out to safety. The appellant came to the spot pulled Nandana's hair and beat her due to which she fell to the ground. The complainant's parents requested the parents of the appellant to restrain his behaviour towards their daughters. The complainant learnt of this incident from his parents. In the evening, when the complainant met his friends as usual near the Ganapati temple, he narrated the incident of the afternoon to them. The complainant and his friends decided to warn the appellant to refrain from such indecent behaviour. They tried contacting him at home at about 7. 15 pm. The complainant did not find the appellant at home at that point of time and therefore, returned to the Ganapati temple. He tried to meet the appellant twice thereafter at about 8. 45 pm and 11. 30 pm. On both the occasions, the complainant was unsuccessful. He: returned to the Ganapati temple after 11. 30 and told his friends about the same. All of them then proceeded towards the house of the appellant. Just after midnight, the complainant and his friends including Mujib, Bajrang PW2 and Ravindra, PW3 knocked on the door of the appellant and called out to him. Within minutes, the appellant came out from his house after switching on the light. The complainant questioned the appellant's behaviour towards his teenaged sisters. While the complainant was talking, the appellant whisked out a knife which he held behind his back and stabbed Mujib in the stomach. Mujib collapsed to the: ground. The complainant and Ravindra tried to snatch the knife from the appellant, shouting at the same time to the appellant to drop it. However, the appellant struck the complainant on the forehead with a knife. The appellant gave another blow with the knife to the complainant on his head near the right ear. Ravindra made an attempt to snatch the knife out of the appellant's hand. However, he was also struck with the knife. Bajrang who had accompanied them, was struck on the back by the appellant with the knife when he bent over to ascertain Mujib's well being. Hearing the cries of the four friends, the family members of the complainant and the appellant as well as the neighbours came out of their house. The appellant threatened to kill the complainant and thereafter ran away from the place of the incident taking his knife with him. Mujib was taken in a rickshaw to a hospital run by Dr. Arjun ghate. The Doctor advised them to take Mujib to the Government hospital immediately due to his deteriorating condition. Mujib was then shifted to K. E. M. hospital. The Doctors there treated the complainant and his other two friends ravindra and Bajrang for the injuries sustained by them. Mujib succumbed to his injuries at around 2 am on 10-7-1999 in the hospital. The complaint was then lodged with the Police. The appellant was arrested and he has been charged for committing the offences punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having murdered Mujib and under section 324 for causing hurt to the complainant and two others.

(3.) The prosecution has examined 21 witnesses in order to prove the guilt of the appellant. PW1, PW2 and PW3 i. e. , the complainant and his two friends are the persons who have sustained the injuries. PW4, PW5, PW6, PW7 and PW8 are the panch witnesses. PW9 claims to be an eye witness of the incident. PW 10 and PW11 are the Doctors. PW12 is a witness who has turned hostile. PW13 is the witness who has drawn the plan of the scene of the offence. PW 14 to PW21 are the police officials connected with this case. PW20 is the Investigating officer.