LAWS(BOM)-2007-8-47

SAHADU RAMBHAU BELHEKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On August 02, 2007
SAHADU RAMBHAU BELHEKAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. arises from the order of conviction and sentence passed on 30/11/1990 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 55 of 1989. In the said case four accused were put on trial for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 504 read with Section 34 of IPC. All the accused came to be acquitted for the offences they were charged, however, the present appellant-original accused no.1 has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of IPC on the ground that deceased Shantaram died a homicidal death and on account of the injury caused to him by accused no.1 with a spade which the accused no.1 had hit on the head of Shantaram during the incident that had taken place on 1/8/1988 between 8.30 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. and just opposite the house of the accused nos.1 and 2. His bail was continued by this court when the appeal was admitted on 12/12/1990 but on fresh bonds.

(2.) As per the prosecution, deceased Shantaram Kambale was a resident of Ruston Colony at Chinchwad and his brother Madhukar Kambale was residing in Shivdarshan Colony, Chinchwad. On 1/8/1988 Madhukar had gone to the house of Shantaram at about 4.45 p.m. and informed him that the accused no.1 who was residing in his chawl had constructed a latrine in front of his house and because of the same he was put to inconvenience. Shantaram, therefore, accompanied Madhukar to see the W.C. block constructed by the accused. In the meanwhile the Municipal Corporation Officials had paid a visit to the chawl and called upon the accused no.1 to demolish the W.c. as it was on public place and was an obstruction to the neighbours. When Shantaram came out of his brother s house, accused no.1 called Shantaram in front of his house. Shantaram believed that accused no.1 was calling him for some amicable settlement and, therefore, he went to the house of accused no.1 where accused no.1 started abusing Shantaram. At that time accused nos.2 to 4 were present and two of them caught hold of Shantaram and accused no.1 gave a blow with spade on his head and his shoulder. This incident was witnessed by Shri Bhagwat and Vanita, wife of Madhukar and other neighbours. On receiving the injury, Shantaram fell down and, therefore, he was taken by a rickshaw to the Municipal Hospital at Chinchwad. Dr. Ramesh Kambale (PW 6) gave immediate treatment i.e. dressed the head injury and along with the police yadi (Exh.28) Shantaram was sent to the Sassoon Hospital. Dr.Arvind Deshpande (PW 5) admitted Shantaram at Sasoon Hospital and after some time he noticed that Shantaram started becoming paralytic on half side. An offence was registered initially under C.R. No.362 of 1988 under Sections 324, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC. On the next day the panchanama of the scene of offence was drawn. The condition of Shantaram later on started deteriorating and he died at Sassoon Hospital on 16/8/1988. The offence registered was amended and changed to Section 302 of IPC. Accused no.1 was taken in custody on 24-8-1988 and thereafter other three accused were also taken in custody one after another. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial. Charge was framed on 17/8/1990.

(3.) The prosecution examined in all 13 witnesses and three of them were doctors. While Shantaram was undergoing treatment, his statement was recorded in the medical papers as well as by P.W.10 Shri A.E. Abdule. The statements of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. were also recorded. PW 1 Dr.S.D. Nanandkar had performed the post mortem between 10.20 a.m. to 12.00 noon on 16/8/1988. The dead body was identified by police constable Mahashabde. Dr. Nanandkar stated that the dead person was admitted in the Sassoon Hospital earlier and he was about 35 years of age. On external examination of the dead body he noticed the following injuries: