LAXMANDAS MANGALDAS MANIKPURI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/accused in Sessions Case No.130 of 91 of the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. THE learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the accused has come up in appeal.

(2.) ACCUSED Laxmandas, brother of D. W. 3 Khilwandas came along with his wife Subhadra from Kertha Bazar, Tahsil Daundi Lohare, District Durg (MP ). At the relevant time, accused along with his wife Subhadra was residing at Gopalpuri, Chandrapur. D. W. 3 Khilwandas, his younger brother, also came with him to Chandrapur for work. On 10.1. 1991 at about 11.30 p. m. when Subhadra was asleep, accused attacked her with dagger and on that when the blade of dagger broken, he took out axe (Article - 1) and hit her on several parts of the body. The prosecution alleges that after causing injuries to Subhadra, accused proceeded to Police Station. He verified with P. W. 13 Anandrao as to the location of the Police Station and on reaching the Police Station, he tendered exhibit 38, First Information Report before P. W. 17 Dhanraj, Police Sub-Inspector. After recording the said statement, P. W. 17 registered a crime against the accused under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He seized the axe which was produced by accused himself and also seized his clothes. Then he proceeded to the scene of offence and removed injured Subhadra to hospital where she succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter the offence was altered from Section 307 of the Indian Penal code to Section 302 of the code. After completing investigation, P. W. 17 Dhanraj laid charge before the Court against the accused.

(3.) THE prosecution mainly relies on the evidence of P. Ws 1, 2 and D. W. 3 Khilawandas along with the attending circumstances. As has already been noted, there is no occurrence witness as such. Understandably, with due regard to the scene of occurrence and also time of occurrence, there could not have been any occurrence witness, D. W. 3 Khailawandas, at about 7/7. 30 p. m. , as usual, came to the house where the accused along with deceased Subhadra was living, took his dinner and left for sleep at the place where he used to sleep. This occurrence took place in a room which has adjacent rooms where others were residing. PWs 1 and 2 are residents in the nearby rooms. According to them, on hearing cry and commotion, they came out of their respective rooms when they saw the accused going out with an axe in his hand. P. W. 15 Anandrao is auto-rickshaw driver. He swears that at about 11 to 11-15 p. m. while he was standing near auto-rickshaw at Gandhi Square, accused came to that place and asked him as to location of the Police Station. He would swear that he directed the accused to the Police Station and he followed him, P. W. 17 Dhanraj Pakhinde, PSI would swear that the accused appeared before him with an axe in his hand and gave statement (exhibit 38) which he recorded and on the basis of it he registered a crime under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. His evidence further shows, Subhadra was removed to the hospital where she was examined by P. W. 11 and issued Exhibit 32, Wound certificate. THE evidence of P. W. 17 shows, in the same night Subhadra died and on receipt of report to the said effect, the crime was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal code also.