Back
1997 Supreme(SC) 459
1997(3) Supreme 241
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.K. Mukherjee and S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.
Sukhdeo etc. -Appellants
versus
State of Maharashtra -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 1989
With
Criminal Appeal No. 235 of 1989
With
Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 1990
Decided on 11-3-1997
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant in Crl. A. Nos. 31 and 235/89 : Satish Vig, Advocate.
For the Appellant in Crl. A. No. 53/90 : S.M. Tripathi, Advocate (Ms. Rani Jethmalani,) Advocate (NP).
For the Respondent : R.B. Masodkar, Advocate.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 147, 148, 452/149, 323/149, 302/149-Convictions under-Appeal-Motive-Four persons met with homicidal deaths due to murderous assault with deadly weapons-All appellants were personally known to witnesses since they were residents of same village-Wanjari community as a united front had caused attack on harijans-All witnesses of fact closely related to deceased persons-Their evidence cannot be discarded on that score-Evidence of eye witnesses find corroboration from medical evidence-Recovery of certain incriminating articles-Trial Court and High Court in their well reasoned Judgments discussed evidence carefully-Convictions recorded are legally sustainable-Convictions recorded by High Court of those accused who were acquitted by trial court do not call for interference-Findings of guilt recorded by High Court is based on correct appreciation of evidence.
Held : We have carefully gone through the evidence of the above witnesses of facts and we are satisfied that the findings of facts recorded by the courts below as regards these appellants being the members of the unlawful assembly sharing a common object and in pursuance thereof causing assault on four victims by axes, sticks etc. and thereby committing their murders suffer from no infirmity. Further more, the evidence of these eye witnesses find corroboration from the medical evidence vis-a-vis the injuries on the four deceased persons and the weapons used by them. In addition to this evidence, there is also other materials on record in the form of recovery of certain incriminating articles through seizure panchnamas and the evidence of panch witnesses thereof. The trial court as well as the High Court in their well reasoned judgments have discussed the oral and documentary evidence on record very carefully and we are in agreement with the said appreciation of evidence and findings recorded by them. (Para 17)
JUDGMENT
S.P. Kurdukar, J.-A small village called Anterweli in Tehsil Gangakhed Distt. Parbhani on June 4, 1982 at about 2.00 p.m. witnessed the gruesome murders of three brothers, namely, Hari, Govinda & Limbaji, sons of Tuljiram Ghobale, and Narayan son of Bapu Tayade who happened to be their nephew (sister s son) at the hands of a riotous mob of nearly forth Wanjari people residing in the same village. In the said rioting incident, apart from four deaths, as many as six persons, namely, Sopan (PW 2), Kondabai (PW 6), Bapu (PW 7), Phul Chand (PW 8), Kundlik (PW 21) and Vithal (PW 22) - the complainant had sustained serious injuries. The deceased persons and injured witnesses belonged to Budha Community whereas most of the accused persons numbering forty belonged to Wanjari community. In substance, the members of Wanjari community had attacked the members of Budha community.
2. The members of the Wanjari community of village Anterweli firmly believed that the members of Budha community were involved in committing thefts and decoities in the neighbouring villages thereby causing a bad reputation to the residents of the said village. The members of the Budha community were earning their livelihood either as agricultural labourers or taking the lands of Wanjari people on lease. Some members of the Budha community were also working as Watandar Ramoshis (night watchmen). In view of the alleged notoriety of the Harijan community as a whole, the Wanjari community decided not to engage the services of the former either as agricultural labourers or as a tenants of their lands. Rift between the two communities further widened because of constant bickerings between them. The Harijan community people having found that their living in the said village had rendered miserable, they decided to migrate to the village Mankhed in Ahmedpur taluka, Distt. Latur and accordingly had shifted to that village about one and a half years before the incident in question took place.
3. It is the prosecution case that 3/4 days prior to June 4, 1982, the three brothers (since deceased), their nephew Narayan (since deceased) alongwith their family members and friends came to their village Anterweli to attend the marriage of their relation which was to take place in the said village and also to settle few financial commitments that deceased Govinda had made to Gyanik (A-8). During that period, Babu son of Rama Jayebhaye belonging to Harijan community was being taken to police station at Gangakhed for having abused Sopan Mukada, the Wanjari, under the influence of liquor. Govinda who was then present negotiated with A-8 in the presence of Prabhu (A-5), Shivaji (A-7), Arun (A-22) and Udhav (A-39) by requesting him to let Babu be freed and took responsibility to pay Rs. 1500/- by way of compensation. This amount was, however, not paid to A-8 till the date of incident. This incident had added to further severe bickerings between them and Wanjari people took it as a serious insult. In order to patch up the differences, Govinda (since deceased) and A-8 and his associates had a meeting at the house of Sita Ram Patil at Shelmoha which is about 2 km away from village Anterweli. It was then decided that Govinda would pay the amount to A-8 and would not enter the village Anterweli. In view of this compromise, Govinda, his brothers, Narayan and other family members shifted to a place adjacent to village Anterweli and started living there. The marriage of the relative of Govinda took place on 1st June, 1982 without any disturbance.
4. The Wanjari people did not approve the stay of Govinda and others on the outskirts of village Anterweli and this had led to the incident in question. It is the prosecution case that a mob of as many as forty persons belonging to the Wanjari community, of which, two were juvenile offenders went to the basti of Govinda. The juvenile offender Charnu (A-4) was the main cause for the incident in question. On June 3, 1982, Manika (PW 15) sensing so
