SITARAM SOMA BHOYE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant was convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC for life by the Judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik dated 13-5-1994 which is under challenge in this Appeal. THE charge against the Appellant was that on 19-10-1993 at about 2-00 p. m. in the house of the complainant at Village Hatlondhi, Taluka Peth, District Nashik he committed murder by intentionally and knowingly causing the death of deceased Ambibai Janu Bhoye and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 of IPC. He was also charged for committing house tress pass by entering into the house of complainant thereby committing offence under Section 449 of IPC. THE Appellant was acquitted from this charge. THE case set up by the prosecution is as under : Deceased Ambibai Janu was wife of Janu Tulshiram Bhoye P. W.4 . THE Deceased was residing with her husband, son Bhagwan and daughter-in-law Yamunabai P. W.3 . THE Accused appellant is also closely related to deceased. Prior to the incident, the appellant suspected that Ambibai was witch. One month prior to the death of Ambibai accused Sitaram lost his daughter. He was convinced that his daughter died due to witchcraft played by Ambibai. He openly proclaimed that he would kill Ambibai. On 10-10-1993 at 2.00 p. m. deceased Ambibai was sitting in her house with daughter-in-law Yamunabai. At that time accused came with knife. He assaulted her with knife on chest resulting instantaneous death. Yamunabia raised shouts. THE Appellant ran away from the back of the house leaving behind knife at the spot. Hearing the cry, the husband of the deceased came there. Yamunabai explained to him about the incident. THEreafter, he went to Police Station and made a report to PSI Akolkar who registered the offence as Crime No.29/93 under Sections 302 and 449 IPC. PSI Akolkar also rushed to the spot and conducted the inquest in the presence of Atmaram Bhoye (P. W. 1) and Saijabi Bhoye. He found injuries on the body of the deceased. He seized knife from the spot. He also collected blood mixed earth. On the following day he prepared arrest Panchanama of accused. He seized bush-shirt and half pant of the accused. Dr. V. K. Jamdhade conducted postmortem on the dead body and found two main injuries on her stomach. . THEreafter, H. C. Jadhav seized Bhotya (Article No.6) blouse (Article No.7), piece of cloth (Article No.8), thread containing beads (Article No.9) and piece of bangle (Article No.10), under Panchanama (Exh. 11 ). THEreafter, seized articles were sent to C. A. for examination. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court of JMFC Nashik which was subsequently committed to the Court of Sessions. Defence of the accused is that of total denial. THE accused alleges that Yamunabai's husband Bhagwan committed murder of Ambibai. We have closely examined the evidence in this case and Judgment of the Court below. We have examined the evidence of P. W. 3 Yamunabai, she says that on the particular day at 2.00 p. m. while she were sitting with her mother-in-law deceased in the kitchen, accused Sitaram came there and assaulted her mother-in-law with knife on her chest. He pushed her and thereafter, assaulted her. THEn she shouted for help in the name of father-in-law shouting "run-Run Mama". Sitaram accused left knife there only and went away from the back door. Her father-in-law who was sitting in front of the door of the house came there. She narrated everything to Sitaram by the time she died. Her father-in-law went to Police Station to make the report. She identified the accused before the Court. She also identified the knife. She has spoken about the ill-will he had about the deceased. She has spoken that the accused has a grudge against the deceased on account of the death of his daughter and she has also spoken about the open declaration that the had made earlier that he will kill her. Her evidence could not be shaken in the cross-examination. She had actually seen the offence being committed. Her presence at the occurrence cannot be doubted. Her evidence inspires fullest confidence. We find no ground to disbelieve her. THE Lower Court is fully justified in believing her to sustain the prosecution. P. W. 4 Janu, husband of the deceased says that the accused had suspicioun about the deceased as she did not employ with craft on account of which his daughter died. P. W. 4 also spoke about that accused was openly declaring that he will kill the deceased one day or the other. He says on the day of incident, he was sitting on ota in front of the house of Ragho Tulshiram, when his wife, daughter-in-law, grand son and grand daughter were in the house. His Children are 2 to 3 years of age. THE daughter-in-law P. W. 3 shouted "run Mamaji" He immediately rushed to the spot and found that intestine of deceased had come out P. W. 3 gave him details at what had happened. He then immediately reported to the Police Exh. .14. THEreafter police came and prepared Panchanama. Sitaram accused ran away by leaving behind knife on the spot. He contacted in the night. P. W. 5 Manik K. Akolkar, Police Sub-Inspector attached to Harsul Police Station. He says that on 10-10-93 Janu Bhoye P. W. 4 made a report to him. It was counter signed. He registered the offence vide crime register No.29/93 under Sections 302, 449 IPC. He made an endorsement on report under his signature. THE place of occurance is 12 Kilometers away from the Police Station. He held Inquest, prepared spot panchanama, and seized articles 1 to 3 on the spot. On the same day, he recorded statement of Yamunabai, and arrested the accused at 12-00 (Night) at Harsul S. T. Stand. THE accused was wearing bush shirt and half Pant. Both were blood stained and they were seized under Panchanama and sent for chemical Analysis. After investigation, he submitted the report. Dr. Jamdhade conducted post mortem who was examined as P. W.6 . He noticed two injuries on the body of the deceased and all were ante-mortem injuries. He says that the injuries No.1) could not have been be caused by knife. Injury Nos. 1 and 2 were the fatal and could be likely to be caused by the knife. He categorically stated that the injuries 1 and 2 were singularly in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. C. A. reports show the blood stain on the knife and cloth recovered from the body of the deceased and accused found that blood group was common i. e. A. Though the blood group of deceased was not taken, Report says that on the cloth and knife, human blood was found. Blood stains on the cloth corroborates fully the evidence of P. W. 3 A contention was raised on behalf of the accused that so long as blood group of accused was not identified as belonging to group 'a' it is not safer to rely these materials supplied in C. A. to saddle the accused with the offence. We are of the opinion that merely because the blood group of the deceased was not checked that will not be fatal to the prosecution case if other evidence is strongly present. On appreciation of evidence as discussed above, we have no doubt in our mind about the guilt of the accused. Even though ocular witnesses are related to the deceased and no grounds have been made out to doubt the veracity of the evidence of these witnesses. THE prosecution, according to us has established the guilty of the accused. We have no doubt on any count that the Judgment of the Court below could be assailed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. THE conviction and sentence of life imprisonment awarded by the trial court to the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is confirmed. THE Appellant is in Jail and shall remain there till he serves out his sentence. Appeal allowed. .