NAVALCHAND MOTIRAM JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge is to the judgment and order dated 07 112000 in Sessions Case 200/1998, delivered by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, by and under which the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "accused") is convicted of offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to payment of fine Rs.1,000/. The accused also faced trial for offences punishable under Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and under Section 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, he is, however, acquitted of the said offences.

(2.) Heard Shri Pushkar Ghare, learned Counsel for the accused and Shri H.R. Dhumale, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

(3.) Shri Pushkar Ghare, learned Counsel for the accused submits that the judgment is against the weight of evidence. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the panchanama of the spot where the incident allegedly took place. The injured complainant and the other prosecution witnesses are giving different versions of the spot of the alleged incident, is the submission. The learned Counsel for the accused submits that the accused has more than probablised the defence that P.W.1 Vasanta suffered injury since his head dashed against a tin roof. The learned Counsel would then submit that the medical evidence is totally inconsistent with the ocular evidence. The veracity and credibility of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses is in serious doubt, is the submission.