MAHESH JAYAVANTRAO Vs. STATEOF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal appeal is preferred by original sole accused challenging his conviction in Sessions case No. 186 of 2002 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. Said impugned Judgment and order was passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik on 8th May, 2003 convicting the appellant accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer further R/I for three months.

(2.) Prior to discussing the rival arguments, it would be profitable to have the case of the prosecution, narrated in nutshell and also it would be profitable to have some admitted factual position so far as the evidence laid before the learned trial Sessions Court, is concerned.

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that during the period from 9 p.m. of 14th July, 2002 till 2.00 p.m. to 15th July, 2002 at Ambedkar Nagar, Devla, Taluka Devla, District Nashik, appellant accused committed murder of his father by intentionally/knowingly causing his death by means of the assault with the help of one wooden implement locally known as "Mogri". According to the prosecution appellant accused was addicted to liquor and was not having any notable avocation for his likelihood and was in fact quarreling and at times had assaulted the deceased i.e. his own father. The appellant accused then aged about 28 years was not settled in life and as such his father the deceased had assisted him in starting one poultry business. However, such poultry business was not conducted properly and was ultimately shut down and about few months prior to the date of incident which occurred on or about 14 and 15th July, 2002, the appellant accused had taken some casual job of a driver. Also according to the case of the prosecution and the evidence of prosecution witnesses, almost all the relatives of the appellant accused, during the relevant period the appellant accused was staying with his parents and his other brother and sisters were staying separately. Admittedly, prior to the incident the parents of the appellants had been to some last rites occasion at the matrimonial house of mother of the accused and deceased father came back home at Devla on the night of 14th July, 2002 and his mother overstayed at the place of her relations and came back to her house only after knowing the incident of the assault and demise of her husband. Reportedly, on the night of 14th July, 2002 appellant accused and his father the deceased, were at home and allegedly according to the case of the prosecution one Smt. Ajjaya P.W.7, neighbour of the appellant had been to his house. That time she enquired regarding the wife of the deceased and could notice that deceased and appellant accused were only persons present at the house and that deceased was angry as his wife had not came back and on that appellant accused had warned the deceased not to speak any ill against his mother. Also according to the prosecution, this was one of the circumstances linking the appellant accused with the offence of murder as on the night prior to the incident only appellant and his father were present in the house.