KISHOR FAGO BORKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appellant/original accused No.1 has approached this Court seeking challenge to the judgment dtd. 05/12/2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia in Sessions Trial No.105/2014 thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000.00; in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. It is worth mentioning here that the appellant was also tried for the offence punishable under Sec. 324 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC, however the learned Additional Sessions Judge has acquitted him from the said offence.

(2.) Heard Shri H. P. Lingayat, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri H. R. Dhumale, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

(3.) Brief facts of the prosecution case which led to the conviction of the appellant can be summarised as under : The informant PW-1 Jaipal Namdeo Meshram approached the respondent on 27/07/2014 and lodged oral complaint that on 26/07/2014 at around 8.30 pm, accused No.2 Sanjay Borkar assaulted him on the head by means of stick when there was quarrel between him and the original accused No.2 Sanjay and his brother, the present appellant. The elder brother of Jaipal i.e. deceased Ashok Meshram came to resolve the quarrel. Thereafter present appellant brought one knife from his house and co-accused Sanjay Borkar caught hold of Ashok and the present appellant Kishor stabbed the knife in stomach of Ashok because of which Ashok fell down after which the present appellant Kishor and his brother Sanjay went to their home. The informant alleged that the aforesaid quarrel was raised because of the fact that on 22/07/2014 sowing operation in the field of PW-1 Informant was scheduled and the contract was given to one Mayabai Dongare, Satyeshilabai Fago Borkar, Matekar and the present appellant Kishor Fago Borkar and they had agreed to do the same on 22/07/2014. PW-1 further alleged that he and his brother had brought tractor on rent for making mud in the field and had started doing the work, but Sanjay Borkar came and told that lady labourers were not ready to come due to which he stopped the work of making mud. Because of this non sowing of paddy crop, the informant had a quarrel with the present appellant and his brother on 26/07/2014 which resulted into the said fateful incident. On the basis of aforesaid oral complaint, First Information Report No.69/2014 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302, 324 read with Sec. 34 of IPC came to be lodged against the present appellant and his brother Sanjay Borkar. 3. The investigating Officer conducted the investigation and filed charge-sheet after completing the same. After recording the pleas, the learned trial Court framed charge to which the present appellant and his brother pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. It is worthy of mentioning that accused No.2 Sanjay Borkar faced the trial till recording of his statement under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned trial Court. However, after recording of his statement, Sanjay Borkar had expired while in jail and thus the trial against him stood abated.