STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SANGITA GULAB CHAURE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal of the state, seeks to challenge the acquittal of the respondents for the offences punishable under section 302, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also of respondent no.1 Sangita for the offence punishable under section 109 read with section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Respondents in appeal and one Sau. Kamla (respondent No.1 in Revision application) and one Gajanan (respondent no.4 in revision application) were prosecuted for the offences punishable under section 147, 148, 302, 201 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondents are original accused no.2, 3, 5 and accused no. 6. Accused no.1 Sau. Kamla; mother of accused no.2 Sangita; accused no.4 Gajanan now P.W. 6 approver. are residents of Mahavir Nagar, Dabki Road, Akola. At the relevant time, deceased Narayan Chotelal Gohar was residing with accused no.1 and accused no.2 at their house at Mahavir Nagar, Akola. He is the husband of P.W. 4 Kamla. He had illicit relations with accused no.1 Kamla. Therefore, there were no good terms between the family of said Narayan and accused no.1 Kamla. Accused no.3 Baiju had love affair with accused no.2 Sangita and this was not liked by deceased Narayan. It is alleged that all these accused then with common object to cause murder of said Narayan, on 29.7.1989 at about 8.30 p.m. at Mahavir Nagar formed unlawful assembly, some of them armed with deadly weapons like spear, dagger, chain and pipe, & caused his murder by assaulting him and causing fatal injuries. According to the prosecution at the relevant time, said accused No.1 Kamla and accused no.2 Sangita were at their house. The rest of the accused, had followed the deceased for some time and when he was about to take turn for his house, rest of the accused had assaulted him with the aforesaid weapons and caused his death. He was lying there. It is alleged that accused Sangita when noticed him lying in injured condition in front of her house, she informed about this fact to P.W.-1 Raju who is son of deceased Narayan(Revision applicant). Thereafter, the said Narayan in injured condition was taken to police station and then to Civil Hospital, however, he was declared dead. P.W.1 Raju had expressed suspicion on accused no.1 Kamla and accused no.2 Sangita for killing his father. Police then arrested accused Kamla and accused Sangita. It appears that during investigation, the names of the rest of the accused were revealed as an assailants. During further investigation, accused no.3 Baiju disclosed about concealing of chain, spear and rod, which were used in the commission of the offence near the burial ground, and the same were recovered at his instance. Accused no.5 Vijay also discovered knife on memorandum statement. Thereafter, on information, furnished by the accused no.4 Gajanan and accused no.6 Ashok, blood stained clothes were recovered. Dead body was sent for P.M. Examination. Dr. Kadale P.W.7 who conducted autopsy, sent his P.M. Report and opinion to I.O. According to him deceased Narayan had died due to extensive brain damage with haemorrhage from wounds. The clothes of the deceased and the accused and instruments recovered were sent to C.A. The report was received. It may be stated that during the investigation it was transpired that one Jayant Joshi P.W. 3 had found some chits written by accused Sangita to accused Baiju expressing her love affair, so the opinion of the Handwriting Expert was obtained. It was also found in the investigation, that the accused Baiju had taken knife from P.W. 5 Ramesh Pande by threatening. After completing the investigation the I.O., P.I. Rathod submitted charge sheet against the accused referred above.

(3.) When charge was framed, the accused pleaded not guilty to the same. Their defence is that of total denial and that they have been falsely implicated at the instance of P.W. 1 Raju son of the deceased.