MOTIRAM GAMAN PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant original accused No.1 has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik in Sessions Case No. 105 of 1992 dated 22-3-1994. The appellant and another co-accused Sitaram alias Malsing Dalsingh More were placed for trial before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon for the offence punishable under section 302 read with 34 I.P.C. As per the prosecution case the accused of the said trial has involved in the offence which took place on or about 1-5-1992 at Antapur Shivar in the public place Gairan Pandi and committed murder of Maharu Genda Sonawane who happened to be the step-father of accused No.1. It is the prosecution case that the appellant accused No.1 had assaulted said Shri Maharu with knife and said Shri Maharu died due to multiple bodily injuries and accordingly the accused have committed offence punishable under section 302 I.P.C. read with 34 I.P.C.

(2.) It is the prosecution case that village Jaitapur is situated within the jurisdiction of Jaykheda Police Station at Tal. Satana. One Maharu Sonavane and his wife Godibai stays there. Godibai had married with him about 22 years back and here husband Maharu had one keep by name Mainabai who resided at Mohangi. Accused No.1 Motiram Gaman Pawar is the son of said Mainabai and accused No.2 Sitaram @ Malsing Dalsingh More is from village Deothan. At the relevant time Godibai resided with her husband Maharu in the house provided by her father and her father resided adjacent to the house of Godibai. It is the case of the prosecution that on 1-5-1992 in the morning Godibai, in the company of her husband, had gone to the house of one Raghu Swarge and they returned home in the noon. At about 6 p.m. Godibai and her husband Maharu were sitting on the Ota of their house. Accused No.1 Motiram came there and asked her husband to come with him to the village and accordingly Maharu went with accused No.1. It is the prosecution case that when she was at her house, accused No.2 Motiram came at the house of Godibai on a bicycle and told her to come with him as her husband Maharu was being assaulted with knife by accused No.1 Motiram. It is alleged that Sitaram left cycle in the court yard of her house. Godibai, one Baliram, accused No.2 Sitaram and some other persons then went by road in search of Motiram and her husband. On the way Motiram was found concealing himself in the bushes of Besharam. He was wearing red coloured Baniyan and pant. The pant of the accused was stained with blood. They took Motiram with them at the house of Shamkant Pawar, the Sarpanch of village Antapur. On reaching the house of Sarpanch, Godibai narrated that her husband had gone with accused No.1 and till night he was not returned and accordingly the enquired from accused No.1. On questioning by Sarpanch, accused No.1 told that he had assaulted Maharu with knife near Waki Nallah. This statement was made by accused No.1 Motiram in presence of Shamkant Pawar, Godibai and some other persons and all of them went with both the accused to Waki Nallah where they found dead body of deceased Maharu. They noticed some injury on the dead body of Maharu on chest and neck who was lying in a pool of blood. 3-4 blows were seen to have been given to Maharu. With the torchlight Sarpanch Shamkant Pawar and other persons inspected the dead body. The Sarpanch sent message to Police Patil and told one village Kotwal to keep watch on the dead body. It is the prosecution case that accused No.1 Motiram and Sarpanch went to Jaykheda Police Station with one Shivaji and one Gangadhar and he complaint was lodged by him against Motiram Pawar. The complaint was recorded by P.S.O. and the offence was registered against Motiram for the offence under section -302 I.P.C. Shri Aher, Sub-Inspector was on duty at the Police Station and he detained accused Motiram at the Police Station and proceeded in a Government jeep and went to Antapur at the spot of offence where the dead body was lying in the stream. After reaching the place of incident he came back to the Police Station and recorded the Panchanama about the condition of the accused in the Police Station. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was wearing a pant which was stained with blood and the cash of Rs. 200/- was found on his person. Then sandows banian of red colour was also attached from his person. It was having blood stains. One underpant of rose colour was also attached from the person of accused Motiram under Panchanama. Thereafter the inquest panchanama was drawn in presence of Panchas and the scene of Panchanama was also recorded in presence of Panchas. The cloth found on the dead-body was also attached. Those clothes were also found with the blood stains. The statement of the witnesses were recorded and dead body of Maharu was sent to the Rural Hospital Satana for performing post-mortem. It is also the prosecution case that the post-mortem was performed by Dr. Wagh, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Stana and thereafter the articles were sent in favour of the Chemical Analyser. Investigation of the said case as handed over to Shri Salve, S.D.P.O. at Manmad and he was also proceeded further in connection with the investigation and on getting the desire of the accused of the accused to show the spot of offence where he had assaulted Maharu after recording the statement and taking the Panchas further investigation by drawing Panchanama was also effected. The weapon used in commission of the offence were also seized in presence of panchas and necessary Panchanama and the statement of accused the preliminary statement were also recorded. He has also recorded further statement of the witnesses and on getting the report from the Chemical Analyser's office and the medical certificate including the post-mortem notes, the charge-sheet was submitted at the competent court on 28-7-1992. The investigation officer has also taken 7/12 extract on the field of the deceased. The prosecution case to connect the accused with regard to the motive is to the effect that there was a dispute between accused No.1 Motiram and his father i.e. the deceased Maharu about partition of the field and for this reason the accused assaulted the deceased Maharu with knife and committed his murder.

(3.) Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and their defence was that of false implication in the offence. Before the trial court, the prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced documentary evidence viz. Panchanama of the scene of offence, arrest Panchanama, Panchanama regarding weapon and cloth of the deceased and the accused and the post-mortem note and the first information report. In the statement under section 330 Cr.P.C., accused No.1 has stated that the prosecution story is false and he has further stated in his statement that Godibai was his step-mother and she had falsely involved him in the offence. So far as the statement of accused No.2, he has admitted everything in respect of evidence given by the witnesses against accused No.1. However, he denied the evidence in respect of the role attributed to him in respect of murder of deceased Maharu. He admitted that he had taken accused No.1 Motiram to Sarpanch and also the confessional statement was given by accused No.1 before the Sarpanch Shamkant Pawar, Godibai and some other persons.